Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project
Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Northampton, MA
Allan Rosenfield
Interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless
October 28–29, 2003; April 27, 2004 New York, NewYork
This interview was made possible with generous support from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
© Sophia Smith Collection 2006
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College
Narrator
Allan Rosenfield, M.D., F.A.C.O.G. (b. 1933) is dean of the Mailman School of Public Health and was the founding director of the Center for Population and Family Health at Columbia University. He serves on the boards of a number of international, national, state and local health- related organizations. Dr. Rosenfield has worked throughout the world, notably in Nigeria and Thailand, and has written extensively on domestic and international issues in the fields of population, women’s reproductive health, human rights and health policy. http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/sph/popfam/fac/rosenfield.html
Interviewer
Rebecca Sharpless directed the Institute for Oral History at Baylor University in Waco, Texas, from 1993 to 2006. She is the author of Fertile Ground, Narrow Choices: Women on Texas Cotton Farms, 1900–1940 (University of North Carolina Press, 1999). She is also co-editor, with Thomas L. Charlton and Lois E. Myers, of Handbook of Oral History (AltaMira Press, 2006). In 2006 she joined the department of history at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, Texas.
Restrictions
None
Format
Four 60-minute audiocassettes.
Transcript
Transcribed, audited and edited at Baylor University; editing completed at Smith College. Transcript has been reviewed and approved by Allan Rosenfield.
Bibliography and Footnote Citation Forms
Audio Recording
Bibliography: Rosenfield, Allan. Interview by Rebecca Sharpless. Audio recording, October 28– 29, 2003; April 27, 2004. Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project, Sophia Smith Collection. Footnote: Allan Rosenfield, interview by Rebecca Sharpless, audio recording, October 28, 2003, Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project, Sophia Smith Collection, tape 1.
Transcript
Bibliography: Rosenfield, Allan. Interview by Rebecca Sharpless. Transcript of audio recording, October 28–29, 2003; April 27, 2004. Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project, Sophia Smith Collection. Footnote: Allan Rosenfield, interview by Rebecca Sharpless, transcript of audio recording, October 28–29, 2003, April 27, 2004, Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project, Sophia Smith Collection, p. 23.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 1 of 3 Page 1 of 96
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project
Allan Rosenfield
Interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless October 29–30, 2003; April 27, 2004 New York, New York
Sharpless Okay. Today is October 29th, 2003. My name is Rebecca Sharpless, and
this is the first oral history interview with Dr. Allan Rosenfield, dean of the
Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University. The interview is
taking place in his office at the School of Public Health, his office looking
out over the Hudson and the George Washington Bridge. And he’s
graciously agreed to spend some time with me today. Dr. Rosenfield,
you’ve had a wonderful career in public health and caring for women and
reproductive health. And I’m very grateful to you for spending this time
with me today. What I want to do is to back you up a little bit and talk a
little bit about—how did you decide to become a doctor?
Rosenfield My father was a leading obstetrician/gynecologist in Boston, and so I
always was interested in medicine. I used to make rounds with him. There
were two of us, my brother and I. My brother was older. And at one point,
he decided he wasn’t going into medicine, so therefore it was my
responsibility, he used to jokingly say. I went in without any thoughts of
the kind of career I ended up in—without thoughts about population,
family planning, or public health.
So after college at Harvard I went straight to medical school, I guess,
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College
in part because of my father’s work and in part because of a personal
interest. I can’t say I loved medical school, particularly the first two years,
which are very heavy basic science. I enjoyed the clinical years a lot
more—the last two years—and made the decision that I thought I’d like to
go into obstetrics and gynecology, and that I’d like to train in a particular
program in Boston at Harvard—what was then called the Boston Lying-In
Hospital. They required two years of general surgery prior to going on into
the OB residency. I went to medical school at Columbia Medical school—
the College of Physicians and Surgeons [P&S], it’s now called.
Sharpless Um-hm, right across the street here?
Rosenfield Well, it’s part of this whole campus. We’re all on the Columbia Health
Sciences campus. And the medical school and the School of Public Health
are all on campus, as well as the nursing and dental schools. So I applied to
P&S, and went to P&S. And then for my training, I went back to Boston,
where for two years, I did general surgery in Boston. And then I was in the
era of the doctor’s draft.
Sharpless The doctor’s draft?
Rosenfield Yeah. In those days you could gamble whether or not you were going to
be drafted right in the middle of something or you could—there was a
doctor’s draft plan—you could tell them when you wanted to go and then
not be pulled out of something in the middle. So I planned to go between
the two years of general surgery and the start of my OB residency. So I
was assigned to Seoul, Korea, which is not where I expected. They told me
I was going to Germany or France. But, that didn’t happen.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Sharpless Now, were you an OB/GYN at this point?
Rosenfield No, I had just finished my two years of surgery. So I was what you call sort
of a partially trained surgeon, which is a category in the military. And I
went to Korea for a year. Actually, I was assigned to go to Thule,
Greenland. And I was very unhappy with that assignment. They said, well,
there were no alternatives except if you wanted to go to Korea. They
assumed I wouldn’t. But, I said, “Yes, I’ll take it. I’d be a lot more
interested in Korea than Thule, Greenland.” And it was a good decision.
It was after the war, but before Korea embarked on its extraordinary
economic growth. It was a very poor country back then. It was a very
interesting introduction for me to the problems of the developing world
(telephone rings) and I didn’t have a lot to offer because of the amount of
training I had at that point. That was interesting. I was still not considering
a public health career or thinking about population issues, but—something
became inculcated there.
And I guess one other point about how I ended up—none of this was
planned. During medical school here—in those days the Montefiore
Hospital was still a teaching hospital at Columbia. Einstein Medical School
[Albert Einstein College of Medicine] was just being founded. And the
head of that hospital was an individual who was very charismatic and who
had amazing concern about the community, not just about clinical care but
about the community. And that at that time did not exist at P&S. We were
sort of an elite institution on the hill and the community was lucky to have
us.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Sharpless It was strictly academic at that point.
Rosenfield And I think that head of hospital also had an impact on me.
Sharpless What was his name?
Rosenfield Martin Cherkasky. He’s someone very well known who passed away a
couple of years ago and who was a pioneer in the concept that an academic
institution and a hospital had a responsibility to the community in addition
to simply being a site where medical care is provided. And that maybe
stirred something in me, even a public health type agenda.
So, I came back from Korea and went into my OB residency. And
some—
Sharpless In Boston—?
Rosenfield In Boston.
Sharpless At the Lying-In—?
Rosenfield It was then the Boston Lying-In and Free Hospital for Women, which in
time became the Brigham and Women’s Hospital. They joined with us—
what was, in my time, the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital. My dad had been
head of OB/GYN at the Beth Israel Hospital in Boston. So the BLI, as it
was called, was the sister institution of Harvard, where I did my OB
training—not at his institution. Somewhere near the end of it, there was a
Peace Corps–like influence—some combination of my time in Korea and
my interest in community activities and the Peace Corps era of the early
sixties that made me think—I was in my residency in OB from ’63 to
’66—that I would be interested in something before I went into practice in
Boston.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College I had made plans to possibly play some role in my dad’s practice. I had
made plans with someone who was about a year behind me in the
residency to go into practice together, and to have a practice primarily at
the Brigham, not at the BI. But some relationship, I’m sure, would have
developed with my dad, as well.
Sharpless Um-hm.
Rosenfield (telephone rings) But I wanted to do something else for a little bit of time.
Board-trained people didn’t go to the Peace Corps. So my chairman
identified an opportunity for someone at my level to work and teach in
Nigeria—at a brand new university teaching hospital in Lagos, Nigeria.
And so I went for one year with a plan to come back. And everybody
expected me back, I expected to come back and go into practice with this
colleague of mine. But I really got interested there, began to think about
issues of family planning and population, thanks to a wonderful mentor,
Dr. Robert Wright, a senior public health physician from Hopkins who
was running the department of community medicine at this hospital. This
was a new medical school that was turning over leadership to Nigerian
physicians. And they already had a number of extraordinary Nigerians, but
in OB the head of the department, Dr. Wright, was someone from Ireland
and in community medicine.
Sharpless This was not too long after independence, right?
Rosenfield Right—1966 was early on when there was great hope and promise for
Nigeria. And it was—my wife and I arrived there just about a year before
the civil war, and left—by coincidence, my time was up maybe a week
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College before the civil war in Nigeria.
Sharpless Wow.
Rosenfield So I went there and opened my eyes to the issues of health care in poor
countries and some of the issues. And Dr. Wright had a major influence
on me. He was very interested in family planning, albeit as a public health
person, not as an OB person. And this wasn’t an area of great interest in
Nigeria at the time. But he was trying to promote it—and it was a little bit
difficult for a white American professor to be promoting family planning,
but in a subtle, careful way, he was having an impact on the department
and the Nigerian faculty that were there.
Sharpless Now, explain to me what the difference is between a public health view
and an OB/GYN view.
Rosenfield Well, public health and medicine have a lot of overlapping areas, but
there’s a significant cultural and organizational difference. In public health,
we think about prevention first for populations and medicine—how to
heal the individual—later. In public health, I’m interested in a broad array
of problems, whether it’s population issues, you know, how to put into
place a national family planning program, how to deal with maternal
mortality on a grand scale. So we’re population based, prevention oriented,
and medicine is individual, cure oriented. And while there’s lots of overlap
and differences, the culture—at one point here at Columbia, I was both
head of the Department of OB/GYN and head of the public health–
oriented Center for Population and Family Health. And that was really
very interesting because it was two very different cultures.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College It was during the Reagan administration, and my OB colleagues were
sort of supporters of Reagan and his kind of economic policies which
supported their own personal income and practices. Over at the school of
public health, Reagan was the enemy—we’re not focused so much on
personal gain. Everybody wants to make a living, but the central piece is
the programs in which we’re engaged. So there’s a different culture. And
that’s not to be negative on physicians, who ideally have consciences as
well. But there’s a different focus in medicine versus public health.
Sharpless And how did you see that playing out in Nigeria?
Rosenfield In Nigeria, I was still very much a clinician. I was there to teach physicians
and medical students—
Sharpless Okay, so this was a teaching post?
Rosenfield This was a teaching post. As far as seeing patients, I was operating, I was
delivering babies, working with what we would call residents and interns.
And my introduction to some of the public health agenda was through Dr.
Wright, chair of the Department of Community Medicine, who was
interested in the family planning, population-related issues in Nigeria, and
that was sort of my beginning. Actually, another part of my introduction to
being interested in population came through the Pathfinder Fund. This
was a small organization at that time run by the Gamble family. Richard
Gamble, who later ended up running the Pathfinder Fund for a number of
years, was the son of the founder of the Pathfinder Fund. He was living in
Nigeria as a businessman when I was there. And my wife and I were
socially fairly friendly with him and his then wife—he divorced and
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College remarried later. And through him, I met his mother. I think his father may
have died by then. But Mrs. Gamble was still carrying on, as were some
others who worked with Pathfinder’s almost missionary approach at that
time. In fact, I remember receiving a supply of IUDs [intrauterine devices]
after their person visited, and I hadn’t asked for them, but they just arrived
as part of their you-ought-to-be-doing-family-planning-at-your-OB-clinic.
So, I was there for one year, and planned to go back to Boston and
practice. But I had gotten somewhat of a bug about health issues in
developing countries. I had been working in an infertility clinic where the
people there wanted me to stay on, to work on both infertility and family
planning in a new clinic they intended to build. It never got built because
of the civil war that broke out. So I was looking at what I might do. I
considered accepting, even though it was a very low-paying job—I was
receiving a Nigerian salary. I was newly married, and that year in Nigeria
was our honeymoon, in effect. And that was fine for both of us for a year.
Although they gave us housing at a very low cost and funded my work, I
wasn’t sure I wanted to do that for a second year at that level. But I
debated it.
Meanwhile, Dr. Wright, who wanted me to join the Hopkins
program—but he had little or no funding—suggested I interview with the
Population Council. I followed his advice, went back to the States, and was
interviewed by people at the Council. And they were interested in me
because I’d had a year of overseas experience. They didn’t have many OBs
with any experience in population. At that time, they didn’t even know
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College what the word demography meant. And so after my meetings in New
York, I flew back to Nigeria, and in two weeks they offered me a job. I
decided to accept, telling my friends in Boston, “One more year and I’ll be
back.”
So I went to New York awaiting my country assignment, and it turned
out they assigned me probably the only assignment that would have kept
me with the organization. I probably would’ve gone back to practice if
they had sent me anywhere but Thailand. And so my wife and I went to
Thailand for one year and stayed six. Our children were born there and
Thailand was an extraordinary opportunity, an extraordinary experience.
And that’s where my life direction turned one hundred and eighty degrees.
Thailand changed my career.
Sharpless Okay. When you arrived in Thailand, what did you find? What was the
situation like?
Rosenfield Well, interestingly, I was basically totally unprepared for the role I was
undertaking. Everybody was very kind to me in New York when I was
getting ready to go, except for one person who was a very smart and
experienced international health person at the Rockefeller Foundation. I
went to meet with him and get advice. And he rather bluntly said, “What
qualifications have you got to be doing this job?” “I’m an obstetrician,
but,” I said, “I don’t know—maybe none.” And, basically, I hadn’t been
trained in public health, I didn’t understand the issues that were current in
Thailand. I didn’t know that much about family planning at that time,
other than what I learned as a resident in OB/GYN. So, I was humbled by
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College that.
But I went there and there was someone else who at that point was
representative—a social science–oriented person. My job was based in the
ministry of health. He was based elsewhere. And I sort of learned on the
job. And I arrived at a time when Thailand didn’t have a population policy,
didn’t have major plans in family planning. But I arrived at exactly the
same time as the new undersecretary—now they call the permanent
secretary—at the ministry of health. He decided that Thailand was going to
get active in family planning, and he wanted help in getting ready for that.
They’d had a couple of Pop Council–sponsored national meetings on
population. And they had had one research project in a rural district which
had demonstrated tremendous interest on the part of a lot of women in
family planning services, particularly the IUD in that study. So that was
what was there on the ground. Contraceptive prevalence when I arrived
there was about 3 or 4 percent. There were no family planning programs
other than a small hospital-based demonstration program, an earlier
research project and one or two national meetings that had taken place.
Sharpless So was the Pop Council the only presence there?
Rosenfield Pretty much. Ford Foundation was there, but with a broader agenda. And
we had someone at one of the universities, Chulalongkorn University,
helping develop a demographic studies program. Someone from the Pop
Council came around the time I came, I guess, so maybe there was already
something called the National Economic Development Board, helping
with the economic implications of population growth. And I replaced
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College another physician who’d been working at the ministry of health who had
left because she didn’t think anything was going to happen. And the
Council wanted her to go to Pakistan, to what is now Bangladesh, based in
East Pakistan. And with the advent of this new undersecretary who was
more interested than some of his predecessors—who had been interested
but hadn’t really moved forward very much—he decided to move forward.
Luckily, I arrived just at the time he had made that decision. And I was
working with a couple of Thai colleagues in the right part of the ministry.
We began to develop the plans for a national family planning program. So
I happened in at exactly the right time. And it was right there at the end of
the year that I was into something really exciting. But I did go through a
difficult time. In the summer after the first year, the University of North
Carolina, which had an active program in Thailand, basically wanted to
recruit me to come back to UNC after my second year. And it was to be a
very exciting position. I was going to have a position in OB/GYN part
time, in the School of Public Health and the field of maternal and child
health. And also, they had an active population studies center. And I would
be responsible for UNC’s activities in Thailand. It was really a very nice
academic opening for a young academic—I was early in my career and
could have gone there. And I accepted to come a year later.
And then as that year got closer, I got more and more uncomfortable
with the fact that this was the wrong time to go. I had not begun to write. I
did a lot of writing in Thailand eventually. And there was too much
happening. I was in a unique position. And I won’t go into the details of
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College my negotiations with UNC. But I actually flew back to try to convince
them to at least give me one or two more years. And they didn’t want to
do that. I left Chapel Hill saying, “Yes, I’ll come.” I came back and was
very depressed.
Finally, through discussions at the Pop Council and such, I withdrew
from accepting the position. The person in OB sort of understood,
because he thought it was kind of strange anyway. OBs don’t do what I
was doing. The person in the population center understood because he’d
worked overseas. The person who was really upset and angry with me was
the person at the School of Public Health, the chairman of MCH, because
he was a very organized man with plans of what I was going to do. And he
was going to have to substitute at the last minute. So he was very angry.
The good news in that is about a year or so later, he did come to
Thailand for UNC for three months—sort of a short sabbatical. And we
became the closest of friends. And he understood why I stayed, forgave
me. And when he was ill, and they were having a sort of testimonial dinner
at UNC, the family and he chose me as the person to come give the major
address. So I knew I had been forgiven. A few years later, I went back
when he tragically died and spoke at his funeral.
But the six years there were—it was just an extraordinary opportunity.
Thailand has ended up with probably one of the most successful national
family planning programs in the world. I’m the one who—Mechai
[Viravaidya] may or may not have told you—brought Mechai into the
population field, and we’ve been friends since 1968 or so. That’s a great
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College story. But it’s in his book.
Sharpless [From] Condoms and Cabbages.
Rosenfield Along with Malcolm Potts. We wrote the introduction to that book. And
he does describe fairly accurately—not he, but the person who wrote it—
Mechai and I got together—basically we agreed to do some work with the
private family planning association there.
Sharpless How does one build a national family planning program from scratch?
What did you do in Thailand?
Rosenfield Sort of the right person at the right time, where almost anything I
suggested worked. Things work in Thailand because they’re very pragmatic
people. I sat in the division of family health, which encompassed maternal
and child health, where the head of it who sort of was interested—not the
easiest man to deal with. But for the first year or two that I was there, I
collaborated with a woman doctor who had worked in the original rural
family planning research project. And she’d come in to help develop the
program. We would sit and talk and think of what we had to do, and we
began to develop training programs and training modules and things like
that.
Probably the single most important thing I did there, maybe the most
important single study I’ve ever done—it was clear that family planning
services were not getting out because there weren’t very many doctors in
rural areas at that time. A lot more now, but at that time, there weren’t.
And I became more and more convinced as an obstetrician that you didn’t
really need a doctor to prescribe oral contraceptives. And so, today it
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College would’ve taken much longer to plan the study—with all the necessary
reviews. We actually did the study in just one year-long period of time. But
I came up with an idea of developing a checklist for auxiliary midwives to
use.
Auxiliary midwives—there were probably three thousand of them in
Thailand. They were scattered around the country in rural areas, ostensibly
to do maternity care. But they didn’t really have much more to offer than
the granny midwives, the TBAs [traditional birth attendants], had to offer.
And the TBAs would come and stay with the family for two or three days.
These auxiliary midwives were not being well utilized. People weren’t using
them to deliver babies.
So it seemed to me that they were a great force to be able to train to
provide oral contraceptives following a simple checklist. Complicated to
do, and again today it would’ve been much more difficult, because it
wasn’t the standard of care at the time in the U.S. I felt, on a risk-benefit
analysis, that it was more than justified to set up this new type of program.
And we developed a—I was not a researcher at the time—but we
developed a simple design. In four provinces, the midwives would be
trained to use a checklist, and allowed to prescribe oral contraceptives.
And ten out of twelve of the provinces would be as usual—only doctors.
And there was a huge uptake in the pill acceptance in the four study
provinces over the next year.
And we finished the study basically in one year. Like I say, it would’ve
taken us that year just to plan it in current day ways you develop that kind
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College of a study. It wasn’t too well designed, because I didn’t know anything
about design, but we did it. I had a little bit of money from the Pop
Council that was sort of my discretionary fund for the ministry. And we
did it with small money without going through any kind of review process
in the States.
And it actually changed family planning in Thailand. The ministry
reviewed it. There were no deaths, there were no unexpected events, and
proved that auxiliary midwives could prescribe pills in the national
program. We had already embarked on a training program in case that was
the finding. So there were a lot of midwives already ready to do it. And
family planning just took off. IUDs were still popular. They didn’t go
down. Those were the only methods, along with sterilization at that point
in time. But it was just added. The IUDs continued to increase somewhat.
But pills just took off—you could get them in the local community for the
trained auxiliary midwives. Subsequent studies addressed how you could
train non-physicians to insert IUDs. And that was another study. And
injectibles came in.
We had studies, and those were actually—some of those were after I
left Thailand, but [involved] the same concept of use of non-medical
personnel, non-physician personnel to prescribe that. So that had a major
impact on family planning in Thailand. And part of it was because the
Thais were so pragmatic. In some other places, that might not have
worked as well. But it did, they accepted it, and we moved forward very
quickly. And the concept spread to many other countries throughout the
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College world.
Somewhere along that time was when I did meet Mechai. Mechai was
writing a very articulate English-language column in one of the English-
language papers. He wrote a terrific article on population, and I got to
meet him in about 1968—and he was a young Thai of Scottish and Thai
parents. His father was a Thai physician, his mother a Scottish physician.
And he had gone to Australia for education and was somewhat of a
playboy in Australia, but very smart, majored in economics and came back
to—no graduate education—to a fairly responsible position on the
economic planning board. And I think in conjunction with the then head
of the planning board, he wrote this article in the English-language [paper],
a series of articles under a pseudonym which was called GNP, on a variety
of ideas, many of which were probably sounding boards for the director
general of the organization—the two of them were quite close—ideas that
they wanted to surface and get the public thinking about that he couldn’t
do officially, so he wrote under this pseudonym this article on population.
And someone then introduced me to him.
He resigned not too long after that from the planning board to run for
office in Bangkok. He didn’t win, but he was then doing some consulting
work for a couple of banks and I said, “Why don’t you—there’s this new
private association that’s not doing well. Why don’t you spend a day or two
up there and help them?” And he did, and eventually he took it over—
interesting coup. And while he didn’t totally succeed in that, he had
another opportunity to set up a new organization with IPPF [International
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Planned Parenthood Federation] help, the only time the IPPF ever set up
an organization that wasn’t part of their family planning network—or
affiliates, and that was initially called Community Based Family Planning. It
actually became Population Development Association.
And he had a significant impact on family planning because he
popularized condoms and he talked about family planning—in many ways,
a very charismatic man. The Thai family planning program probably would
have been a dramatic success even without Mechai, but he really did help
move it forward, and certainly, the press helped locally and globally,
because the charisma he brought to the thing, made the thing better and
better.
Sharpless Um-hm.
Rosenfield Where Mechai had—save it for another time—had an important impact
on family planning, but he also had a dramatic impact on Thailand, on
AIDS, in terms of their response to AIDS. Need to go change your tape?
Sharpless Yeah, I need to turn it over.
T a pe 1, side 1, ends; side 2 begins.
Okay.
Rosenfield And AIDS is where Mechai deserves a prize. If you’re interested another
time we can talk about that.
Sharpless Um-hm.
Rosenfield So, the Thailand experience for me was—as I tell people, that was my
public health training, was in the field there, rather than formal training.
And because Thailand was beginning to move in family planning, and also
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College had a wonderful population studies program in Chulalongkorn University,
and an interesting economic planning board–type program—I, by the
second year, had become the representative of the Council so I was
involved in these two other initiatives, although my own office was in the
ministry of health. It was a different era for the Pop Council. Nowadays
they have regional offices, and they’re involved in a lot of regional work. I
did some things in the region, but I was primarily based in Thailand, and I
didn’t have a Pop Council office, I was in the ministry. We had someone at
Chulalongkorn and someone at the NESDB—National Economic and
Social Development Board. So we were really working with the
government.
When I was at the ministry of health, there was only one other
organization that had an office in the ministry, and one that was very close
to the ministry. In the ministry was WHO with offices, and UNICEF was
nearby. I was the only other non-Thai. It was a wonderful opportunity to
do a lot of interesting work with the Thais. And it was interesting. It was
an era where I only had maybe a budget of fifty thousand dollars a year
that the council gave to me and the ministry to work with. USAID was not
a major player yet—they did come in, in about 1968 or ’9, but they were
not funding me or my programs, so I didn’t have to do what people have
to do today, in terms of working with USAID.
Sharpless USAID—(both speaking) USAID is kind of the five-hundred pound
canary.
Rosenfield Can be. But at that time, I was the key person there, and they would
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College interact with me, as did a couple of the other foundations, because I was in
the ministry and they weren’t. And they were just starting the program. I
was very friendly actually with the first population officer who was
assigned there—a very good person. But, as compared to today, there was
no e-mail, there was no fax, there were telephones. If I wanted to call New
York, or they wanted to call me, I had to book a call at the central post
office. And mail took two, three, four weeks. So I was pretty much on my
own.
And while I was inexperienced, I had some common sense and some
good Thai people to work with. And much of what I did was sort of on
my own, without people in New York telling me what I should or
shouldn’t be doing. And because things were working well, I continued to
have a long leash and do what I wanted. So it was a unique opportunity. It
was the only kind of job that would have kept me from going back to
Boston to practice.
During my first year in Thailand, I did do some clinical work. But the
place I was working, Chulalongkorn Hospital, was across town with heavy
traffic, and it became more and more difficult. And I was doing a lot of
upcountry travel and it became unreliable. So I basically withdrew from
it—and that’s when I basically became a public health doctor.
Sharpless Um-hm. And you were based in Bangkok?
Rosenfield I was based in Bangkok but traveled all over the country. So it was a
unique experience, and as I say, it led—one of the other good things about
Thailand is that Bangkok is an attractive city to visit. So almost everybody
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College in the population field, from demographers to sociologists to public health
people to bio-medical researchers, if they were going to Asia, they almost
always made Bangkok one of the places they would visit. And because I
was sort of one of the most well-connected persons among the foreign
community, most of them would come to see me at one point or another.
So I really had the opportunity to meet all kinds of people from other
fields I would normally not have met. So I became a pseudo-demographer
and a pseudo-sociologist, just because of the opportunities to meet some
wonderful people who came through Bangkok for meetings, or business,
or whatever. And also because the council had some extraordinarily good
people that they recruited. I stayed there for six years, but during that time
there were a series of people that came into Chulalongkorn and NESDB,
and I had the opportunity to learn from them and they all became friends,
so it was a good situation.
Sharpless What changes did you see family planning making in Thailand? What
difference did it make?
Rosenfield Well, when I came there, the number of people practicing modern
contraception with prevalence was about 3 percent, and most of that was
in Bangkok, most of that was sterilization. For the most part, it was
sterilization programs.
Sharpless They had significant maternal mortality problems?
Rosenfield They had significant maternal mortality problems, and they had family size
of six or seven kids by the time someone completed family childbearing. It
was clear from a couple of the early surveys that women and men were
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College interested in smaller family size. And the successes were well beyond
anything I would have predicted during my six years there. But by today,
Thailand is like a western nation. About 65 to 70 percent of the people are
using one form of contraception or another. On the average people have
two kids, maybe three, but somewhere between two or three kids per
couple by the end of childbearing. They moved into totally western-style
demographic position—appearance.
And that was not through coercion, not through paying people to do
things, it was because that’s what they wanted to do. They wanted better
education for kids, they wanted better job opportunities, whatever. So it
really allowed the Thais, ahead of many other countries, to do what they
basically wanted to do, and facilitated that happening more easily than it
would otherwise have happened. And the Thais are very good about
reviewing all of the modern methods, and if they were acceptable by WHO
or USFDA standards, then that was okay to introduce. And so they kept
introducing the newer methods: the injectibles, the implants and such,
newer IUDs and what have you.
Sharpless You did quite a bit of research on technology and delivery while you were
there.
Rosenfield Mainly on, one, the use of paramedics; two, looking at some of the
different contraceptive methods, some related to how you deliver services.
Accidentally, I prevented Thailand from having a difficult time with the
Dalkon Shield that occurred in this country.
Sharpless What happened?
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Rosenfield Well, the people selling it tried to convince the Thais they ought to use it. I
had no idea it was going to cause the problem it caused. But the IUD, the
Lippes Loop, which was the one being used, when it straightened out was
a very thin IUD insertion. The Dalkon Shield was a shield and (telephone
rings) it didn’t really become a small thing. It was painful to put it in, as
compared to the Lippes (telephone rings), and it was painful to get out.
And I just advised, you know, you’ve got a good IUD. This one doesn’t
make sense, I don’t like the way it looks. And the Thais bought that, and
we never introduced it. But it wasn’t (telephone rings)—I can’t say it was
because I knew of the problems it caused. But nonetheless, I saved
Thailand from—pretty much single-handedly on that one—from having to
deal with deaths from Dalkon Shields.
Sharpless Yeah.
Rosenfield But it was not because I had predicted that. As someone who was doing
IUD insertions at that time, I had done a few Dalkon Shields and I just
thought, women really have pain with this one going in, and I had taken a
few out, and it was very painful to remove them. I didn’t have that
problem with the IUD, and then the copper T was coming in soon
afterwards, which was even easier to insert. So that was the IUD— good
luck on IUDs.
Sharpless What about sterilization?
Rosenfield Sterilization was a major method of contraception in Thailand in the
beginning. It was the first method. And when I went there for the Council,
one of the big programs the Council had was something called the post-
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College partum program, because—helping educate women, at the time of delivery
and before, if you saw them, about the opportunity for sterilization if they
had as many kids as they wanted to have. So Thailand had an active female
sterilization program, and Mechai made efforts to popularize male
vasectomy with a moderate degree of success, but far more women were
sterilized than men, as is true in many countries, not all—it depends.
And the major thing that family planning provided was opportunity for
women to use reversible contraception until they were really certain that
they did not want any more children ever. So sterilization, I think, was
actually number one. The pill was number two if you combine both male
and female sterilization—which is also true worldwide. Sterilization is one.
And Thailand is one of the places where research on laparoscopic-type
sterilization procedures [was conducted], and open laparoscopy was
developed in Thailand. And so again I was in the forefront of some of the
contraception and sterilization research, some while I was there, some after
I left. The whole concept of that kind of research grew out of the auxiliary
midwife study.
Sharpless Um-hm. To what extent could or did what happened in Thailand be
replicated in other countries?
Rosenfield Well, take the pill study. I did spend a moderate amount of time in the
other countries. I went to both Philippines and Indonesia, but mainly
Indonesia. And, working with some colleagues in Indonesia, we introduced
the checklist there as well. And so pill off prescription took hold there, and
through some of the writings and such, that became a model in other
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College countries that you could do this.
It was interesting—I had gotten to know the Indonesians—well, I
almost went to Indonesia when I finished in Thailand, instead of coming
back. I was offered a job at the World Bank to lead a bank team on family
planning. But at that time, I had some reservations about the style and the
way that the Bank worked in countries, and decided I probably wouldn’t
be happy. But the Indonesians were quite supportive and encouraged me
to come. And they liked the checklist, and they used it in the program, and
one of the subsequent consultants from the WHO wanted to—there was a
cute story—he wanted to simplify the checklist. And the Indonesians
would not let that happen unless I came down and said that was okay,
because it was my checklist, and they couldn’t change it for their country. I
was flattered. And I was more than open to seeing it simplified if it could
be done and still protect the health of women.
But I was very pleased, and I’ve been very interested in maternal
mortality and other areas since, especially in the role of personnel other
than doctors—particularly when you’re working in poor countries and in
rural areas where there just aren’t a lot of doctors available. Whether it’s
considering how to train non-doctors to provide a caesarean section and
other emergency obstetrical care, anesthesia and a variety of things—for
that matter, emergency care more generally, including trauma from car
accidents, et cetera—you need trained people in district hospitals where
there may not be sufficient numbers of doctors. So the pill was sort of an
introduction to me into the potential of other personnel who could be
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College trained to provide various levels of care.
Sharpless How different was the Philippines as a Catholic country?
Rosenfield The politics of family planning were a little more complicated, but the
government had a formal population (telephone rings) commission and a
very active private population organization. I forgot the name of it, but it
was sponsored by Mrs. Marcos. The Marcoses were clearly very bad
people, but they did allow and support the development of family planning
activities. The Catholic Church—it’s sort of like in Latin America—the
Catholic Church is against family planning and contraception, but they sort
of closed their eyes—except when the Pope comes by. Family planning
services became fairly successful in the Philippines, and certainly equally so
or more in many parts of Latin America, which is similarly predominantly
Catholic. Philippines didn’t go anywhere near as far as the Thais did, and
the success of the program certainly has progressed a lot over the years
from where they were, say in 1970, to where they are today.
Indonesia had very dynamic leadership within their family planning
program. One reason I regretted not going there was that I would have
gotten to work with the person who did run the program, with whom I
had become good friends. They probably did better than the Philippines in
terms of where they took their national program.
Sharpless Um-hm. So, you were in Thailand for six years. You turned down the
position in Boston, turned down the position in Chapel Hill. How did you
decide when it was time to leave Thailand?
Rosenfield Oh, the Council began saying, You’ve been there six years, don’t you think
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College it’s time—they wanted me to come back and run something in New York,
a major program in New York. And my family was saying, You’ve been
overseas for seven years: we never see our grandchildren. I was not very
sympathetic. I am more so now that I have grandchildren, (Sharpless
laughs) but I was not—yeah—I’m on my own, I’m doing my thing, leave
me alone. And in fact, both of us were saying that, because my wife was
very happy in Thailand. But finally—you know, they almost had to pull me
out. I kept vacillating on whether I really wanted to come back, or do I
want to go to Indonesia. But maybe six years was enough time.
I finally decided it was time to go back. And debated a couple of jobs,
one of which was to come back to the council in and run a broad-based
program, which in retrospect, was not that dissimilar from our maternal
mortality initiative now. That program did not succeed, unfortunately. And
after being in the Council for about a year, I decided I really didn’t want to
be in that kind of position, and I started looking. I really wanted to go back
to Boston, but we’d bought a house and so I thought, Well, I’ll stay in
New York a little longer.
And I considered two jobs. Mount Sinai Hospital was looking for
someone to run the OB/GYN service in their city hospital in Elmhurst.
(telephone rings) And Columbia was interested in—they had had funds to
set up from Ford Foundation something called the International Institute
for the Study of Human Reproduction. And it was having some difficulties
for a variety of complex reasons. And first they approached me to run that.
(pause in recording)
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Sharpless Okay, when you stopped to take the phone call, you were talking a little bit
about what you were going to do—after leaving Pop Council, and I did
want to ask you one or two other questions about that, your time back
here in the New York office at the Pop Council. How much were you
around Mr. Rockefeller?
Rosenfield Very little.
Sharpless Very little?
Rosenfield The person I admired most on the Pop Council in those days was Barney
Berelson, who was the president and I thought was a great man. And there
were some very good people at the Council in that era. When I first flew to
New York—I happened to joke with him later when I learned more about
the world—I paid my own way to come to New York to see whether this
is what I wanted to do, and I realized later that they would have paid for
me if I’d only asked. But there was a man named Cliff Pease, who has
passed away—most of the people have passed away—and a man named
Richmond Anderson, who ran what was then called the Technical
Assistance Division. Today it’s the International Programs Department.
Those are the people I met when I came from Nigeria, and those were the
same people—I guess by the time I came back to New York, Dr.
Anderson had retired—Cliff Pease was in charge of the Technical
Assistance Division. Berelson was very important as the president, and a
man named Parker Mauldin, who I’m sure is on the list of people because
he’s a man now in his mid to late eighties. So he was very active until his
wife died, and he sort of—in the last years I guess she had Alzheimer’s—in
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College the last bit of time he sort of was withdrew and took care of her. But he
was vibrant and active—at least up to close to eighty, I think. And so there
were some wonderful people at the Pop Council in those days.
When I debated about coming back, aside from going to the
Council—Rockefeller was recruiting me for a position at Rockefeller, but
they were going through a transition that wasn’t quite clear as to who
you’d be reporting to and what it was. And they couldn’t really give me
some answers, and so I decided not to go there. Had I gone to Rockefeller
Foundation, it is not inconceivable I would have become the president of
the Council, because they were having a very difficult search process at
that time. And they weren’t finding people they liked, and really just
struggling. And one or two people had suggested my name, even though I
would have been very young for the position at that time. But I would
have jumped over a number of people at the Council to become a
candidate. But had I been at Rockefeller, and had I done well at
Rockefeller for a year or so—some people thought that might have
happened.
But I came back to run an interesting program on maternity care and
family planning, a global program called the Taylor/Berelson Program.
Howard Taylor was a former chairman of OB/GYN here at Columbia and
a very distinguished obstetrician in the country, and he’d linked up with
Berelson and come up with this program idea. And I came back to run it.
There were going to be sites in six countries around the world. And I did
run it for a year and a half until I finally made my decision to leave.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Sharpless What were the problems with it?
Rosenfield In retrospect, I should have stuck with it, and put it in very much like the
maternal mortality program I had (telephone rings) but—
Sharpless What were they trying to do?
Rosenfield They were trying to make maternity care services (telephone rings)
available to women who don’t have access in poor countries, and link an
effective family planning program to them.
Sharpless Okay.
Rosenfield It was a little heavily U.S. modeled at that time. I didn’t totally buy into
some of the ways we were introducing the program. And the funding
sources were iffy for the longer term. Again, that’s a program I probably
should have stayed with longer, and done more to try make it as successful
as I think it might have been able to have been. But my job, while sort of
running it, was also a heavy desk job, and I began thinking—I also by then
had been away for seven years, and I was thinking, Is there some kind of
job where I can do some of what I’m going to continue to do
internationally, but also deal with some of the issues and problems that
exist locally? And the job that Columbia was offering me gave me that
opportunity to develop a new program that was both domestic and
international in orientation. And that ended up calling me.
This international institute I already mentioned to you was having
major difficulties, and they originally approached me to possibly run that,
but that ran into difficulty, and they decided that essentially—although
they kept the name—to divide it into two independent centers. One center
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College for biomedical research, and one a more applied center and I was recruited
to basically establish the center of population and family health, which was
a small program when I took it over, and grew into a very large program.
Sharpless Well, let me ask you one more question about the Pop Council, and then I
know you need to get downtown.
Rosenfield Right.
Sharpless Mr. Rockefeller’s speech in 1974 at Bucharest has been noted by a number
of people as maybe shifting some ground in the field of population. How
much did you notice it at that time? And how would you evaluate its
impact?
Rosenfield Its major impact at that time, that I saw—I’ll tell you [about its impact]
locally and I’ll say more later, probably—it was seen by Berelson as a
personal attack on him. And he was very, very hurt, and angered by that
speech which sort of was unexpected. Joan Dunlop, as you know, played a
significant role in that. And it wasn’t too long after that that Berelson made
his decision to step down. He’d had a very good relationship with JDR
before that, and I think the relationship soured because of the tone of the
speech and what Barney, who was a very sensitive person, took as a
personal affront.
Actually, there were two things that happened with Barney that were
sort of unfortunate, because I really did like him. Around the time—just
prior to my coming back, and before the international Bucharest meeting
on population—the Council organized their first-ever field retreat, a retreat
for New York and field staff. And I had written a—something I have
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College searched for and searched for, and no one can find it either at the Pop
Council or here—but I wrote a long, like four- or five-page, single-spaced
thing towards the end of my time in Thailand on thoughts from the field.
And it wasn’t really critical, but it was just raising issues that sometimes
you forget about when you’re in the New York office compared to being
in a field office. And it generated quite a response. I got a long letter from
Berelson, a long letter from the vice president, a long letter from Cliff
Pease. And it generated some of the discussion at the retreat. There was a
very frank discussion at the retreat. A lot of things came out that—
problems that New York didn’t think about. I thought it was one of the
healthiest retreats of this type that I had been at.
Barney took it personally, took it as a critique and criticism of him.
And so he was hurt by that, and I don’t think anybody wanted that because
everybody respected and loved him. So people, when they heard how
upset he was, we were all upset that he had that kind of reaction. And then
on top of that came the Bucharest slap by JDR, and those two things led
to his decision to step down as head of the Council. I’ve forgotten how I
got into that.
Sharpless Well, the larger—you said there was a local impact, and then there was a
broader impact of JDR’s statement in Bucharest.
Rosenfield Oh, you know, it began to get people thinking beyond sort of the
demographic aspects of family planning and population, and begin to think
of some of the broader issues—join in creating the International Women’s
Health Coalition, and some of what eventually happened at Cairo. Some
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College would say that JDR got that sort of started, and maybe he did. I don’t
know.
Sharpless Um-hm. Well, why don’t I release you for your—
Rosenfield This is a good breaking time, I would think.
Sharpless —downtown commitment, and we’ll pick it up with your joining
Columbia—
Rosenfield Okay.
Sharpless —tomorrow.
Rosenfield All right.
Sharpless Thank you so much.
Rosenfield Thanks.
end Interview 1
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 33 of 96
Interview 2
Sharpless Okay. Today is October 30th, 2003, and this is the second oral history
interview with Dr. Allan Rosenfield. The interview is taking place in his
office at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University, and
my name is Rebecca Sharpless. Okay. Dr. Rosenfield, when we left off
yesterday, you were just at the point of joining the faculty here at
Columbia, after your time with the Population Council and others, and you
indicated that the work that you were being brought here to do was very
appealing. So, tell me what the scenario was. It was—
Rosenfield One of the leading obstetricians in the country, and actually a cancer
specialist in gynecology, Howard Taylor, had been chairman of obstetrics
and gynecology at Columbia for many years and had created something
called the Institute for the Study of Human Reproduction. And his
concept, when he got some funding from the Ford Foundation to establish
it, was to create in the field of human reproduction and population
something comparable to the Sloan-Kettering Institute on cancer research
[Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center]. And he received a fairly large
grant, and he wanted the Institute to cover basic science all the way
through to the social sciences and applied family planning.
For a variety of reasons, mostly related to the unrest at Columbia in
the late sixties and the riots downtown and all the pressures on the
administration of the university, some of his plans with the Ford
Foundation didn’t materialize. They were going to have a building, quite an
enterprise was planned, but it just never materialized. And although there
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College
Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 34 of 96
was some funding and some things still going on by the time I was being
recruited first to actually run the Institute—but for a variety of reasons, the
senior authorities within the health sciences and the university weren’t sure
that they wanted to maintain the Institute with the same framework. The
decision was made to create two centers, one to continue the work in the
basic sciences and the laboratory, and one to be structured on some of the
broader family planning and population issues of the type I had been
engaged in abroad.
And since they had approached me about the Institute with this plan
for restructuring, they wanted me to come and sort of establish what
became the Center for Population and Family Health. This was attractive
to me because it allowed me to take some of the experiences and things
that I’d been doing overseas and develop a program here at Columbia that
was going to bridge both international activities and domestic activities
with a great deal, I felt, and it turned out to be true, of—what’s the right
word? Just an ability to develop this without a great deal of excess
guidance from on high at Columbia that gave me the ability to develop
what I could and raise the monies that I needed to make that happen.
And so we did develop what we called then, at first, the Center for
Population and Family Health. And we had some U.S. government money
and some foundation money, and that was winding down from the earlier
institute. And I was able, due to the contacts I had made during my time in
Thailand and with the Pop Council, to get some of the donors to give me
an extra year or two of funding to give me a chance to develop the
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 35 of 96
program. And Rockefeller Foundation came on with a grant again to give
me some money to see if I could do what I said I wanted to do. And this
was developed, both an international and domestic program focused on
issues around reproductive health and family planning.
Sharpless Okay. What sorts of—as you started to develop an agenda, what sorts of
issues were you most interested in?
Rosenfield Actually, it’s very interesting. A few years ago, my successor as head of the
Pop Center—we’ve now left and stayed here about eleven years—we
found my original letter to the Rockefeller Foundation and what I wanted
to do with a Pop Center here. And while it wasn’t exactly everything I said
in that letter, it was amazing that the letter I had written in 1975 was still
relevant in 1995, or whenever it was we actually reviewed it, somewhere in
the last five years.
So, what I hoped to do was domestically build a team that included
people providing services, family planning and related reproductive health
services, to the Washington Heights community; develop research
activities around the delivery of care in Manhattan and Lower Manhattan;
be able to build component or demographic studies that were broad,
national and international; and then develop an applied program of applied
research in developing countries—training and research—on issues around
women’s reproductive health and including family planning and eventually,
later, maternal mortality. And the donor community was prepared to
support that concept, and we were able to build a program over a period
that’s been quite successful, and it became quite large.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 36 of 96
In fact, at one point, the programs at the Pop Center were larger than
the rest of the School of Public Health put together—about nineteen
divisions or so. The school is still the smallest school. So it was a great
opportunity. Very early on, as I was building the program, the Center was a
center and as such—at Columbia you can’t make academic appointments
through the Center; you have to have an academic department in a division
of your program. So I was borrowing titles, in effect, from several of the
other departments in the School of Public Health. I made a proposal to the
person who was dean at that time that let me create a department or
division—we called them divisions then—of population and family health,
because there was no comparable program at that time.
Sharpless Uh-huh. I need to stop this while you sign the letter.
Rosenfield Yeah. (pause in recording)
Sharpless Okay, so you went to the dean to ask about creating a division.
Rosenfield Which would allow me then to recruit faculty with appointments in
professorial ranks. And because I had a moderate amount of general-
purpose funds to make it more attractive, because the school is a small
school with a small budget at that time, I said for the first several years I
wouldn’t require budgetary support, that I would cover the budget and
hope eventually that there would be school contribution, but that would be
my offer in order to get this status. And that worked, and we continued to
call it the Center for Population and Family Health, but it was in actual fact
a division, now a department, in the School of Public Health. That allowed
us to grow as we had funding to grow, and be able to make our own
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 37 of 96
appointments, and not have to go to other departments in the School of
Public Health to request—
Sharpless Um-hm.
Rosenfield They allow us to jointly recruit someone even though their role will be
almost totally in the Center.
Sharpless Let me ask you a couple of follow-up questions, if I might. In shifting to
Columbia, what capacities does being at a university, at a medical school,
allow you to have that you didn’t have? I mean, that’s kind of a naïve
question, but what does being at a medical school allow you to do that you
wouldn’t be able to do otherwise?
Rosenfield Certainly the teaching—mainly the teaching component, and having
students around. In an academic institution you’re more inclined to do
research than outside, although the Pop Council is certainly where—
people who have done very credible research are based at the Council, so it
isn’t that you couldn’t do the research. And I guess for me personally this
was coming to a place where I could kind of build my own program. And
that was attractive. And academically, for some people it’s a very attractive
place to be, rather than at a nonprofit. So there were—this was not to play
down what I thought was a very important role at the Pop Council. But an
academic institution is just attractive as a place to try to develop this kind
of program. (laughs)
Sharpless What about the clinical aspects?
Rosenfield Yeah, I couldn’t have been involved in running a family planning program.
I was real involved in the school-based clinics and other community-
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 38 of 96
related activities. From an organization like the Population Council, I
would have been primarily involved with international activities only. This
allowed me the ability to do both domestic and international.
Sharpless Um-hm. This is a new copy of—
Rosenfield Here we go again. (pause in recording)
Sharpless Okay. And how much outreach had there been to the Washington Heights
area prior to this time?
Rosenfield Very—the university, when I was a medical student here, and historically,
the medical school by and large did not reach out very extensively to its
community. It saw itself as a benefit to the community, but—come to us
for what you need. And so I think our program was one of the first major
initiatives to reach out and work in the community.
Sharpless What did you all do?
Rosenfield Initially we developed an evening—we were running the family planning
services for the medical center. And with the identification of teenage
issues as a major issue, we developed sort of the first ever scheduled
evening clinics for teens. And that became called the Young Adult Clinic
for young women [Young Adult Clinic for Female Adolescents].
And a few years later we decided that we really wanted to find a way to
bring young men in, and created a Young Men’s Clinic. One of our social
workers who was very creative—everybody was saying, Well, how do you
get men in, since they do play a role in all of this? They began—they had a
new video camera—they began going out and videoing young kids on the
street break dancing, playing basketball, whatever, and then saying, Come
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 39 of 96
to this clinic site on Monday evenings—you’ll be able to see yourself on
television. And that brought them in. And we had to do that maybe for
six—I don’t know how long, for a while. And then eventually they just
kept milling around just to [have] a place to go, because you could get a
physical exam, you could get a check-up. If you were worried about a
sexually transmitted disease or something, you could do that as well and
get instruction.
So, it became a major—it’s successful to this day, a model of how you
get young men—due to a couple of very creative, adolescent-oriented
social workers and doctors that made it into a national model. So, we
started with clinical services here in the afternoon—all day for adults, but
specialists at the programs in the evening. We were very proud of the—
had major problems with the staff that we overcame connected with our
kids—some of them, in violation, started coming at three and they got in
the way of everybody and people were not happy with us. Eventually we
raised money and we were able to set up our own facility just for family
planning and reproductive health, in a different area, which was a major
step forward for the program. That actually came about at least in part due
to Warren Buffett and his wife and a family named Heilbrunn, for whom
the department is now named, who were early, early Buffet investors and
owe their very large fortune to their having invested in Mr. Buffett back
before he was a very big (unclear)—and then creative leadership of some
people, particularly a woman named Judy Jones, who helped set up these
clinics.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 40 of 96
We established programs for junior high schools, initially two and then
four. Health clinics weren’t making contraceptive services available
because junior high school seemed early, but we were talking to kids about
sex and referring those who were sexually active to our evening clinic—
had one of the social workers working in the school, be there to help get
them, to assist them when they came. And then eventually senior high
school—we were offering service within the high school. And it was a
very—it was one of the first programs (pause in recording)
Sharpless Okay, you were talking about services to the junior high age—
Rosenfield Right. This was a very creative initiative, originally was funded by some
foundations that Judy Jones was able to convince this was an exciting new
way to go. And the community basically liked these programs very much,
signed on to it. And the local politicians liked it, and so the local
politicians, without our urging, which is very unusual, went out and raised
money in Albany to both expand two more, so we had a total of four. And
as the foundation money was decreasing, they advocated for the state and
city to cover these programs, that they were too good to let go because the
foundation [money had come] down.
So those have been very creative programs. We’ve had a wonderful
program in the community to educate parents. There’s a twelve-week
course—they get a little certificate. They treat it like a graduation from
college almost, where they get a lot of skills on how to deal with mainly
mothers, but a few fathers—it’s bilingual, it’s a predominantly Hispanic
community—on how to deal with your kids on sexual issues, drug issues,
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 41 of 96
and all of the other issues that need— if you’re a parent and a teenager in
an inner-city community. So these kinds of things have been a rather
remarkable success. And it was nice that we got, at the same time—that
we’re still doing many of the types of things I did with the Pop Council
overseas.
Sharpless Uh-huh. Thinking about the school thing—“the school thing,” that’s not
very articulate—the school aspect of it, the academic aspect, tell me about
the types of people you recruited as faculty members.
Rosenfield One of the nice things at a school of public health is you can recruit
people from very different backgrounds. We had, at the Pop Center—and
this is true for the school more generally—people from a diverse—we had
some sociologists, demographers. We had a couple of lawyers. We had
people whose basic background was public health. We had some clinician
types—just a broad array of backgrounds. What we were looking for in the
international side were people who actually worked and had been involved
in developing community programming, that had some academic interest
and or good teaching abilities. Domestically, similar—people who were a
little bit of an activist model. So we wanted people who had academic
interest and research interest but also were interested in applying it in
programs in the field.
We were well funded. Some general-purpose monies from the
foundation were augmented. The family planning program was funded by
the feds under their domestic family planning money, and the international
program had a significant amount of money in the early days from the U.S.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 42 of 96
Agency for International Development. We had money from them for
about twelve years. We had major training activities, operations research,
some legal and policy support. We lost in competitive bidding a couple of
these. One program was just canceled by AID. It had nothing to do with
us, it was just an area they cut. But two of them were competitive bidding,
and we lost in both cases, we thought, inappropriately. And we lost the
biggest AID program we had just after the time I had stepped down and
just about the time the new director of the program was coming. Thought
I was giving him a present with a great AID-funded program in
transnational operations research. And instead, to our great surprise, we
lost a competitive bid to, actually, my old organization, the Population
Council, who had submitted a lower bid. And they had some private
money, so they could pilot the program.
Sharpless What was it to do?
Rosenfield Generally, operations research on family planning programs, primarily in
Africa. It was a good program, we had been there for quite a while, we had
a lot of field staff overseas. It was a blow to the people, and it was a blow,
not so much to me, but to me only in that I thought I was passing on to
my successor a successful AID-funded program. As a result, we didn’t go
back to AID, and the Center built a very interesting, foundation-supported
series of initiatives. And so, for the very first time, for our eighth program,
which is not at the Pop Center, we had gone back to AID funding.
But the Pop Center basically ran its programs with some interesting,
innovative activities funded by the foundation world. The general mortality
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 43 of 96
and refugee health and AIDS were—we just didn’t—because the AID can
be somewhat bureaucratic, and many times tended to micromanage
programs, we were freer with our foundation monies to do what we
thought was the right way to do things and with less detail involvement
from the funders. So the Center’s gone through several stages. It was
interesting that I was the first director as a clinician, the second director
was a demographer, and the third is a pediatrician. I had the most
international experience, but my immediate successor had more experience
domestically, with some international, and the current person is more of a
maternal/child health expert than a reproductive health expert, but very
supportive of the reproductive health agendas that the Center continues to
carry, or the department now carries.
Sharpless And what—trying to think of how to word this. Why traditionally has
there not been more interaction between reproductive health and MCH?
Rosenfield Well, it sort of led to the paper Deborah Maine and I did—a colleague of
mine—called “Where’s the M in MCH?” Historically, both in this country
and abroad, maternal/child health was very heavily focused on kids, zero
to five in particular, but young children in general. And without—for
several reasons. One, the majority of physicians involved in the field of
maternal/child health are pediatricians. Obstetrics is a more lucrative
specialty, and more people are doing OB and less involved in some of the
public health agendas than pediatricians. Also, the numbers of kids who
die in the first five years of life are in the millions, whereas the number of
women who die are in the half-million figure. But for a variety of reasons
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 44 of 96
the bulk of attention in maternal/child health has been on the child.
And we wrote this paper in the mid-eighties on “Where’s the M in
MCH?” And the major issue we were focused on was maternal mortality.
Five to six hundred thousand women a year die of complications of
pregnancy, and probably two or three more million people have serious
complications, many of them complications that last for life. So we wanted
to build a program that focused on the issues that—women in public
health programming in the field of maternal/child health. Family planning
was sort of a little bit separate over here, if you will, developed almost in a
vertical type of track. And I think we played a major role in sort of getting
the M back into MCH. So that’s where that—
Sharpless In terms of your programs here in Washington Heights—the national
policies over reproductive health were getting more and more heated, I
would say, in the late seventies and eighties. How did that affect your
work?
Rosenfield Not in any real way, other than—we never signed what you call the
Mexico City clause, which did have an impact on international
programming. We were able to find a mechanism while we still had AID
funding to get around that, so we didn’t have to sign anything.
Sharpless How did you do that?
Rosenfield By describing the kind of programs we were doing, and the way we were
funding them was sufficiently different from the standard that they just
didn’t push us on it, which was surprising because actually there’s no good
reason not to fund us—not to require us to have that. But we never did
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 45 of 96
sign it, and they didn’t take our money away. But I think for the field in
general, the Mexico City clauses, which Clinton did away with but Bush II
put back in, do have a chilling impact on some organizations, who worry
about are they going to get caught, are they going to have to pay a fine. So
there’s been a just not helpful, or a destructive policy for family planning
services and programs.
Sharpless Um-hm. But not a huge impact on your work?
Rosenfield Not a huge impact on our work, but of course we—it was in place before
we left AID operations research, but we had been allowed not to sign, and
by the time they were getting stricter, we were out of AID, and then along
comes the Clinton administration and they did away with it, the Garrett
rules and such. Now George W. has put them back in.
Sharpless Uh-hm. Did the clinics here offer abortion services?
Rosenfield We, until about two or three years ago, we had an abortion service—not in
the clinic: it was in the hospital. It was not as good an abortion service as I
thought Columbia should have. It wasn’t a real user-friendly clinic. We had
doctors who sort of reluctantly rotated through and did abortions one day
a week in their practices. And partly this was because prior chairmen of
OB here were, not anti-choice, but they were also not strongly pro-choice.
And they were not that happy or comfortable in having a major, strong
abortion service identified as such.
More recently, in the last four or five years, one obstetrician who’s
been the medical director of our various programs in the clinic, who met
with our young adults, among others, got very interested in research on
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 46 of 96
some of the medical patients and in running a good abortion service. And
we now do it, not at this hospital, but at the Allen Pavilion, which is at the
tip of the island but part of the Columbia Presbyterian—well, the New
York Presbyterian hospital system. So, I think today we offer a good
abortion service. We have some dedicated physicians and staff working on
it, and better than we had when I was—back, say, five or ten years ago,
when we did have an abortion service, but it was not the kind of abortion
service I wanted to see us have in place.
Sharpless Has that created any difficulty or any controversy for the hospital?
Rosenfield You mean the fact that we have one?
Sharpless Um-hm.
Rosenfield So far, none. No one has called and said, You guys have got to stop. So
far.
Sharpless On a completely different tack, when you were developing the Center, and
then the division, what sorts of changes—or how did you develop a
curriculum?
Rosenfield Not well. (laughter) Fortunately I had some very good people on staff who
were very interested in teaching and curriculum development. And
basically, the core faculty that made up sort of a committee on this, I really
gave the job to developing what an introductory course would look like
and what were some of the required courses you had to take to be in this
major. And that evolved. There’d been some teaching done before I came.
So some of it was continuing what had already been on the books, and
then over a period of time the committees at the Pop Center gelled and
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 47 of 96
more people were there that could understand it and types of offerings,
and they now offer several different tracks. So it evolved over time by
interest of the faculty.
Sharpless Um-hm. And what does your student body look like? What kinds of
people enroll in your program?
Rosenfield A number of five- to ten-year students, and most of our—our student
body is just like the faculty; it’s a huge mix of people. Generally speaking
we like you to have a little bit of experience between college and entering
the school. Not 100 percent, but as a school, and I think Pop is one of the
more—(telephone rings)—and I haven’t been running it for over ten years.
I think that they are a little stricter on having prior experience. Some are
probably, of course, taken right out of college.
But the backgrounds—some of the people have worked in the Peace
Corps, some of the people have worked for a family planning clinic, for a
Planned Parenthood. Some of the people have done research. Some come
from another area of health and just want the major here, and there are
nurses or doctors who work. So, there’s a wide array of backgrounds of
the people—and that’s true for the whole school, not just for the Center of
Population and Family Health. (both talking) The Department of
Population and Family Health.
Sharpless I need to turn the tape.
T a pe 1, side 1, ends; side 2 begins.
Okay. Well, we’ve talked a little bit about the domestic work. Tell me
about how you developed the international work.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 48 of 96
Rosenfield Well, we started with a very active program in the field area of family
planning in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. We had programs both in
training, particularly in Africa, operations research, which I mentioned, and
in some health policy/legal policy issues globally. When my colleague and I
published the paper on “Where’s the M in MCH?” there was a new group
at the Carnegie Corporation, which is a foundation that had an interest in
international health, and we submitted a concept table of what we’d like to
try to do. And working with them, they accepted that, and we got funding
from Carnegie for, I guess, almost ten years—most of the nineties—to run
a program in three West African countries—it was Nigeria, Ghana, and
Sierra Leone, I think, but whatever, three countries, and we began to hone
our interest in that area, and it was totally foundation funding. And that led
to a very large proposal and funding from the Gates foundation in late
1999, I guess.
Fifty million dollar grant, which—at the time it was the largest
foundation grant that Columbia had ever received, not the largest grant
that we had, but the largest foundation grant. And that allowed us to build
a much larger program. We just had a four-and-a-half-year “where are we”
type meeting and we had over three hundred people from fifty countries, a
large representation from several partner agencies like UNICEF, United
Nations Population Fund, CARE, and Save the Children, all working on
this initiative. And the initiative has been, I think, changing the paradigm
of what’s needed to have an impact on maternal mortality. For example,
historically—historically meaning post–World War II—there had been a
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 49 of 96
major focus on training people to deliver women at home with traditional
birth attendants or granny midwifes. And in potential that was a good idea,
but in practice it didn’t have any impact, or very little impact, on maternal
mortality. The traditional midwifes were taught to cut the cord, clean, treat
it so it didn’t get infected—all good things, all preventive of tetanus, but
not having been much of an impact on the health of the women or
maternal mortality rates.
Sharpless Why not?
Rosenfield Training a traditional birth attendant how to cut a cord cleanly doesn’t help
to teach her what to do if the woman has postpartum hemorrhage, if a
woman has obstructed labor, if a woman is having a convulsion from
eclampsia, so that it doesn’t teach the things that kill women. It’s not a
poorly cut cord.
Sharpless Right, the infection—
Rosenfield What kills women—well, infection yes, but mainly you’re worried about
the child when you’re cutting the cord. You’re worried about the woman a
little bit, but you’re predominantly worried about infection of the
newborn. And so, no attention was given in those early programs to the
things that actually killed women. And that’s what we think our program
brought attention to. And we’re—there’s still people who want the
programs to start at village level and do a lot of work in the village, but our
basic mantra on this is, until you have emergency care facilities, at least
district hospital level, everything else you do will have a minor impact,
other than family planning, until you have a place when a woman does
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 50 of 96
have a complication that you’ll have a place to send her. And that’s been
the focus of our program, and while some of our partner agencies had
some reservations at the beginning, they now totally now are all on board.
We’re having a definite impact upon how people think about and
implement programs to change maternal mortality.
Other programs in Pop: on the international side, with the help of one
foundation, we recruited some people to work on reproductive health
issues, and health issues more generally, but in refugee health, within
refugee settings, forced migrations, where conditions were really awful for
people, and what are some of the issues. So we developed a program to
look at that. One of the people that had been very active in operations
research programs—when that grant ended, she had skills that we didn’t
realize in terms of research, because she hadn’t been a major research-type
person, [but did] more applied field-based research. But when we lost that
grant she turned around and presented a terrific proposal to NIH
involving AIDS-related research. And one of them was in Uganda and one
of the areas in Uganda with the highest prevalence in the world at that
particular time. And very unusual of NIH to have someone funded—for
someone they never heard of and doesn’t have a real impressive CV. She
was funded on her first program and has been funded ever since. In
significant ways she worked in AIDS, and has been supplied everything.
Her husband was at Hopkins, and they do a lot of this together.
So it’s a Columbia/Hopkins/local university in Uganda called
Makerere. And it’s a wonderful program and continues to this day, and
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 51 of 96
they’re considered major researchers in the field of HIV/AIDS in Africa.
We since developed other AIDS-related activities, our largest being what
we call the MTCT [Mother to Child Transmission]-Plus Initiative. Did I
mention that?
Sharpless No, you didn’t.
Rosenfield Well, it’s interesting. Over the last three or four years people have
developed low-cost means to try to prevent transmission of HIV from an
HIV-infected mother to her baby during pregnancy. And that’s called the
MTCT program, or PMCT, Prevention of Maternal Child Transmission.
Someone who knew of my work on maternal mortality was running a
meeting in Durban, South Africa, two years ago, and asked me to do a
plenary address, and they said they had my title already worked out for me,
and I said, “Oh really, what is it?” And the title was, Where’s the M in
MTCT Programs?
So when I began to think about it—I hadn’t thought about it before
that. You’re an HIV-positive mother and pregnant, we give you a dose of
drug prevention and give a dose to the baby to prevent him getting it, or
decrease the chances, but then I’m done with you. You go off and basically
you’re going to die in the next two to five years. Partly that was because
there were no funds: that was the year when people thought you couldn’t
get the money to treat. That’s changed how we deal with all this.
And so one of the foundations was looking to do something creative
in relationship to the call from the UN secretary general to—a call to
action to begin to put in place student programs. And they didn’t want to
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 52 of 96
go to work through the UN, but they wanted to be responsive to its call.
This was Rockefeller Foundation. They came to me saying, Would you be
interested in—the idea of the MTCT, of course, came from my talk—
would you like to help coordinate this and give us some idea of how to do
this? One thing led to another, and we did it, and we recommended that
the program be run out of here, not out of the foundation. They wanted to
bring a consortium of foundations, so, a total of about eight foundations,
and they are working on this issue. And it’s become a major program, and
now [it’s] added U.S. government for the first time since I lost our grant
fifteen or sixteen years ago. We’re back with USAID. They’re funding part
of our program, and this is now a program over a hundred million dollars
over five years, so it’s quite a large program, with eight foundations and
the U.S. government.
Sharpless Back when you were working with the Center, with the whole world to
work in, how did you choose what countries to target your work in?
Rosenfield In the family planning program we worked in a large part of Africa. But we
were part of the other organizations that were funded. Initially we were
funded globally, but soon AID decided that was too much for one
university-based organization, so they broke it up into regional programs,
Latin America and Asia and Africa. We run the program for Africa, and so
we worked in a large number of [countries]—not all of them, but a large
number. And it was where the AID mission wanted some programming of
the type we were talking about. The local people wanted it, and we thought
it was appropriate, so it was an investigative process. With our maternal
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 53 of 96
mortality initiative we decided to work with these partner agencies. And
together with the partner agencies we chose the countries around the
world in which we would work. We were very heavily interested in
working in the Indian subcontinent, or South Asia, because that’s where
maternal mortality—the most deaths occur in Asia. So different programs
have different ways of decision-making about which countries in which to
work.
Sharpless You mentioning the subcontinent reminds me of something Nafis Sadik
said to me when she was a physician working at home. And she said that a
man said to her, “So my wife dies, I’ll just get another.” How much has
your work been in dealing with attitudes?
Rosenfield Well, certainly some of it. The concept that it’s natural for women to die in
pregnancy—which was sort of another way of saying what you said, I can
always get another wife—is just foreign to our way of thinking. And part
of what we’re doing is educating them that, one, women don’t need to die
and two, women are valued—and sort of coming out of the Cairo meeting
and other meetings, the concept of the empowerment of women, which
I’m sure Nafis talked about when you talked with her. And so I think that’s
a major issue that has changed—not where we want it to be yet, but it’s
changing.
Sharpless But that has been part of your work over the years?
Rosenfield Absolutely. Our maternal mortality initiative is, and some of our work
before, but it’s based on a human rights framework, equity and access to
services. If women have a human right to get services that are available
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 54 of 96
elsewhere—I mean, it’s not like AIDS, where I don’t have a vaccine to
offer, I don’t have a drug that cures. I have a drug that temporizes it, but
not cures. In maternal mortality we know what to do; it’s a matter [of] that
we haven’t done it. And we make services accessible to people who don’t
have the money and may never.
So the ethical issue is if there are ways to prevent women from dying,
contraceptives which are not hugely expensive, countries have a moral and
ethical obligation to make those services available, and so we’ve been
arguing quite strenuously that the high rates of maternal mortality are
actually an abdication of the human rights agreement.
Sharpless How has that message been received?
Rosenfield Actually with UNICEF, which is our largest partner, particularly in South
Asia, they’ve been talking about human rights as a sort of core value within
UNICEF, but they haven’t really had a good understanding of how to use
that to actually be involved programmatically. And they loved it. In that
sense, the maternal mortality initiative gave them a program in which they
could apply a construct or a concept that they’ve been talking about, but
haven’t figured out quite how to do it. And now they’re doing it with us in
maternal mortality.
Sharpless Looking at your list of publications, since you’ve joined Columbia—
Rosenfield Right.
Sharpless —things like family planning and primary health care. Could you talk a
little bit about that?
Rosenfield Did I write a paper on that?
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 55 of 96
Sharpless Um-hm. (laughter)
Rosenfield Well, both maternity care and family planning services are not tertiary care,
they’re not quarternary care, they’re very simply services that ought to be
readily accessible to all women and men. And they ought to be part of any
kind of a primary health care movement. And even beyond—some of the
programs I supported and advocated for were outside the health care
system. There were several that were social marketing and other things.
Basically, primary health care certainly should include the concept of
family planning and maternity care.
Sharpless And how—
Rosenfield I think the paper was sort of a long exposition on that philosophical
concept.
Sharpless And how well received was that idea?
Rosenfield I think—you know, family planning and reproductive health is a
complicated issue for a lot of people. If you were working overseas on
malaria and called yourself a malariologist, to everybody that’s great, you’re
working to cure a bad disease—or a tuberculosis specialist, or whatever. I
found, in my early years particularly, that a lot of the people who worked
in family planning would not say, I work in family planning, but would
have some broader definition that didn’t sort of tie them to—family
planning wasn’t as bad a word as abortion, but it wasn’t much better.
And so, the idea that I’m a family planner was not something that most
professionals, docs and others, talked about. And I thought that was
wrong. I thought that was as—what’s the right word?—as reputable and
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 56 of 96
reasonable a place to work as someone who works on malaria, or diarrheal
diseases, or any other area. But this certainly was a connotation of work in
that area, was that those people do something I wouldn’t do. And I think
we helped change that. We had really good people, both here and at lots of
other organizations, who are very much concerned with family planning
and family services and the whole range of broader reproductive health
services that sort of grow out of it.
Sharpless How did you change it?
Rosenfield I was fortunate in that—I don’t think I changed it, certainly I didn’t, but a
lot of people taught—but I’ve been fortunate at Columbia, and before that
at the Pop Council, that I do write some, and do public speak some, and
no one has tried to tell me what I can and can’t say—including Columbia. I
sometimes have been out front on abortion issues. And I’ve never been
called on the carpet: No, you can’t cover controversial subjects. So
Columbia has been very good in that regard. And I’ve been pleased with
the university as they’ve sort of left me alone on most of those issues.
Sharpless So, you’re getting the message out that this is an honorable calling.
Rosenfield To a certain extent. You know, in the world of abortion, people fight
abortion, as always. There are a number of people around the country that
think abortion is awful. And many of the medical profession who are
neither strongly anti-choice, or strong—well, if they were strongly pro-
choice it would follow, but are not strongly anti-choice, but are certainly
ambiguous and a little bit confused about where they come down, don’t
really think someone who does abortion is really a real doctor who
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 57 of 96
deserves the same kind of respect as doctors who treat heart disease or—
so we’re not totally there, but it’s a lot better than it was.
Sharpless Um-hm. What about work on reproductive technology over the years?
Rosenfield We haven’t done a lot of that here. I’ve certainly been on committees and
panels and discussions about new contraceptive agents. I’ve been involved
in some of the applied research on injectibles and implants and the newer
medical abortion methods such, [but I have personally not been involved
in basic research. However, Carolyn Westhoff is a joint appointment in
public health and OB-GYN at Columbia and is a leader in contraception
and abortion research.]
Sharpless Um-hm. You mentioned Cairo earlier. What impact did Cairo have on
your work?
Rosenfield On my work?
Sharpless Um-hm. On your work at the school.
Rosenfield I don’t think Cairo had a dramatic impact on our work. But Cairo had an
important impact on population activities. Up until that time much of the
attention of people who funded and were involved in family planning
programming was on population, population growth, and its adverse effect
on social development, which remains a valid concept today. But some
people were quite concerned that by focusing on demographical family
planning numbers, you were in effect developing something that had the
potential of coercion of women. You must practice family planning. You
must be sterilized. China was accused of some of this over the years. And
that became sort of an unfortunate part of it.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 58 of 96
Most of the people I know who work in family planning were not at all
interested in coercive aspects of such programming. And I’m forgetting
what got me started on that.
Sharpless Cairo.
Rosenfield Oh, Cairo. So, Cairo—through the actions of a number of women’s
groups—they wanted—the previous two meetings in ’74 and ’84 focused
very heavily on population and demographic issues. And a lot of the
women’s groups said, That’s not the issue: it isn’t to have golden targets
about demographic change, or about family planning, it’s more about
meeting the needs of women. And if you look at the data in almost every
country where studies have been done, a majority of women do want
family planning services, and certainly enough to meet whatever targets
anybody would want. It says you don’t have to set forced targets; in almost
every setting it will work. Just make the services readily available. So, Cairo
changed the dynamic from focus on demographic issues to more
empowerment of women and human rights. But the rights to family
planning, maternity care, abortion services—so it was more focused on
women and women’s issues. And family planning was a component rather
than population growth was a driver.
I coauthored with two other people, but one person was current head
of IPP[F]— I’ve actually met him, Steve Sinding—initially wrote a first
draft of the paper on a rationale that if you met the needs of women,
stated in surveys, that demographic and health services were taking place,
where sizable percentages didn’t want more children than they had once
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 59 of 96
they had either two or three. That if you met that unmet need, you would
reach most of the demographic targets that have been set around the
world, so that the change and the focus from demographic issues to more
women’s issues—some of the family planning people were very upset with
that change in focus. I wasn’t particularly, because I thought we could
reach the same goals with a somewhat more sympathetic message than we
originally—very heavily demographic message. You’re a population growth
institute, you must do something about it. So—
Sharpless At what point did you become aware of HIV/AIDS? How early did that
have an impact?
Rosenfield Well, certainly it began to come on the scene in this country in the eighties.
I got involved in some of the domestic issues. I chair a committee for the
New York state AIDS advisory council on AIDS. At one point about eight
years ago I became chairman of the actual AIDS advisory council for the
state. So I got involved in domestic issues. I wasn’t a basic researcher on
AIDS, but I was moved, as everybody in the field was, to how this was
impacting a number of gay friends who were dying, like the person who
ran the AIDS advisory council. He was a great person, used to be a
Columbia faculty member, who unbeknownst to us was gay and became
infected, and he died really an awful death. A very smart young man. You
know, he was probably thirty-five or forty at the time he died.
I wasn’t really in the art world that much, but anybody who lived in
lower Manhattan, Greenwich Village, and some of these areas where there
were a lot of gay people, gay men, people just lost all kinds of wonderful
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 60 of 96
people who died. I think it changed the whole perception of gay people.
One, we didn’t know anything about the sexual practices, and two, there
was sort of a stereotype of what a gay person was like. And as you got to
know people through the AIDS epidemic, you saw people who looked like
everybody else. They didn’t fit the stereotypes. They were lawyers, doctors,
researchers, teachers who had a different sexual preference.
And so that’s how I got initially introduced to the field, to all that was
going on in this country. As AIDS began to grow and become such an
extraordinary pandemic in Africa, particularly, because we’d worked in
Africa, just—I don’t know at what point, but it increasingly became clear
we had an [epidemic]. A major—my own personal major involvement
beyond the work of Maria Wawer, who worked in Uganda, is more recent
(airplane noise; unclear). We’re done with my second tape?
Sharpless Almost.
Rosenfield You don’t get a third tape.
Sharpless (laughs) Yeah, let me go ahead and change it.
T a pe 1 ends; tape 2, side 1, begins.
Sharpless This is the second tape of the second interview with Dr. Allan Rosenfield
on October 30th. Okay, you were going to say—
Rosenfield One thing that’s been nice in my career is that I sort of see three
components in the reproductive health side, not my life as a dean or any
other areas in which I’ve been involved, but within the field. I started
primarily with family planning in Thailand and think I made some impact
on the use of auxiliary midwifes to prescribe pills, and some other issues
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 61 of 96
that became, as I learned a lot—some of what I learned I was able to write
about and have an impact, together with my colleague Deborah Maine,
coming up with issues in maternal mortality and “Where’s the M in
MCH?” and developing a program we thought made a difference. And that
was sort of a stage two in my reproductive health career.
And then stage three would be then moving on and looking at the
issues of AIDS. Coupled with that, in addition to work at Columbia, I
became involved with a lot of organizations as a board member, a
committee member, a sort of—I guess I don’t really see myself as that age.
I guess I became more of a senior statesman in the field. But I wanted to
help, then, on the boards of or involved with most of the major population
and public health organizations. I just rotated off the board of Engender
Health, which used to be AVSC International. Been on the board of AGI
forever, the New York board of Population Action International, which
used to be Population Crisis Committee.
Sharpless Did you know General Draper?
Rosenfield Yes. Not well. I was in Thailand when he was at the height of his—I met
him in a meeting in Thailand. I knew almost everybody else after him that
was involved in that organization. I—
Sharpless The list of organizations.
Rosenfield Yeah, I’ve been on those three. I was asked—it seems like after I came
back from Thailand—late seventies, I guess—to go on Planned
Parenthood’s medical advisory committee, PPFA, and the guy who was
chairing that committee had a little debate with the leadership of Planned
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 62 of 96
Parenthood and he resigned, and so even though I had only been there a
year was asked to take over that. When you chair a medical—they don’t
call it medical committee—that automatically puts you on the board of
Planned Parenthood. So I went on the board of Planned Parenthood.
When my term was up as head of the medical committee, I was asked to
stand for election as a regular board member, not as—because of
membership on the committee. So I did, and I was on for the full duration
of Faye Wattleton’s time.
And about the time I was due to rotate off, I was elected vice-chair.
And that means the term was temporarily put aside, and at the end of the
two years I then became—two or three years—I then became chair of the
board, and that takes you off the rotation list. When you’re done being
chair—in those days, at least—you then stayed on the board as sort of an
honorary board member for another two or three years, and finally, after
about ten or eleven years, which is a very long time on that board to be on
continuously—and some people do come back—I actually did step off for
a period of two months. But I then became the chair of the Alan
Guttmacher Institute board, and they very much wanted me back on the
board, because I had all these relationships. I guess I initially became vice-
chair, and then chair.
Sharpless At AGI?
Rosenfield At AGI. And so in my role at AGI, I went back on the board of —AGI
recommended it. So I had about fourteen or fifteen continuous years. I
was there for the entire time of Faye Wattleton and the entire time of her
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 63 of 96
immediate successor, who left under unpleasant circumstances. So I had a
long time.
I think I may be—I’m not sure—when I became chair, I was either
the first or possibly the second chair of Planned Parenthood, PPFA, that
actually was a professional in the field rather than a volunteer. I mean, I
was a volunteer, but I was also a professional in the field. And I think I still
am the only person who has chaired both PPFA and AGI, so that’s kind
of a nice thing. AGI doesn’t rotate quite as frequently, and also brings
people back on. Most of the people who have ever been chair of AGI are
still one way or another on the board. Planned Parenthood—when you
rotate off you generally don’t come back on. I’ve been asked on a few
occasions would I stand for election again for Planned Parenthood. They
get fifteen years’ worth of contribution.
So I’ve been on those and one way or another worked with almost
every major reproductive health, population—not all, but most
organizations, whether on a board or on a committee, or just because of
my friendship with a person who’s running the organization I’ve been
actively involved. And also internationally with WHO and with—I was on
the International Planned Parenthood medical advisory panel for a while.
So I’ve been able to not only work here at Columbia, but have a role—
sometimes I accept too many things, so I’m not as good a board member
as one would like. Even when I try to get off they often say, Well, stay,
we’d like to have your involvement. But I ended up and still am on a lot of
other organizations’ governing structure or committee structure, and now
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 64 of 96
with a couple of foundations in addition to funding (unclear).
Sharpless Coming to this as an outsider to the field, it’s been one of the interesting
and surprising things to me, is how many different organizations there are,
each one with a slightly different—
Rosenfield Right.
Sharpless —niche in the scene. What’s your overview of the reproductive health
scene now, based on, I mean—
Rosenfield Well, it’s a difficult—it’s a difficult time right now. One, because of the
administration, which is very unfriendly to what the field stands for. But
it’s also a difficult time because the major foundation funders that were the
pioneers—the Fords and the Rockefellers and some of those, Mellon, are
really going back on population and reproductive health. And there are
only a smaller number of foundations outside of the U.S. government still
committed to this field. It’s not so much that these other organizations
aren’t committed, it’s just they’re often doing other things. And that’s been
unfortunate for the field, that there are fewer and fewer groups,
foundations, which are funding core activities within family planning and
reproductive health.
Sharpless Are they expecting Gates to pick up the slack, do you think?
Rosenfield No. Gates does have a reproductive health component, but Gates is really
into infectious diseases, more and more technology innovation. They still
have a reproductive health component, and given the size of Gates, that’s
not trivial. So there’s Gates, and there’s Packard Foundation, there’s
Hewlett Foundation, who’s still in, [and] Ford is in, but in a very peripheral
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 65 of 96
way. Rockefeller is barely in. Mellon is funding its last round of programs
in this area, and then they have other things. And then some of the smaller
foundations are still involved. But it is a changing time. And that coupled
with a very unfriendly administration in Washington, it’s not the easiest
time for the various people that develop the population programs.
Sharpless So what’s going to happen?
Rosenfield We’ve got to change the administration.
Sharpless Well, I know that we need to bring this to a stop, but is there anything that
we—I mean, we could do this for many hours, but is there anything in
specific that we need to talk about that we haven’t covered?
Rosenfield Well, unfortunately, you didn’t ask me to talk about the people of the field.
I knew most of the major figures in the field over the last thirty-five years.
And there’s some wonderful people in the field and some controversial
people. That’s been one of the nice things being in it for so long, is that I
know so many. I don’t know as many of the younger people in the field
today.
Sharpless Who are some of your favorites?
Rosenfield No, I’m not going to go there.
Sharpless (laughs; both talking)
Rosenfield There are some wonderful people working in population who do this,
starting with [Bernard R.] Berelson; the people I’ve worked with at the
senior level of the Council: Berelson, [W. Parker] Mauldin, Clifford Pease,
Shelly [Sheldon J.] Segal, who’s remained a very close friend all these years.
I’m sure he’s someone you may be talking to. We still are very close.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 66 of 96
(pause in recording) And then there are just huge numbers of people. At
AGI, Faye Wattleton is obviously a giant. Jeannie Rosoff, who ran a—and
her successor, Sara Seims. A whole bunch of people in AID: Duff
Gillespie, Liz Maguire, others that worked there.
Sharpless And of course they’ve gone into other things, like FHI [Family Health
International]—
Rosenfield And a whole range of newer people on the Pop Council. I mean there’s
just—the list really is a long list of very, very good people whom I’ve been
fortunate enough to work with over the years. Someday I ought to make a
list of all of those people and comment on them. Maybe if we ever do
another interview on this one, I would be willing to sit down and think
about the contributions of various people.
Sharpless That would be a nice thing to do. And I bet we can work that out. So, I’m
making a note because you also said you were going to tell me about
Mechai and AIDS. And I don’t know that we have time to do that or not.
Rosenfield Well, I can give it briefly. I’m through at the end of the day. Briefly, when
the AIDS—you know, Mechai did this wonderful work in popularizing
condoms and developing PDA [Population and Community Development
Association] in a major community-based organization. As AIDS—we all
knew, given the sexual activities that went on both among Thais and
among foreigners who came to Thailand, that it was highly unlikely when
AIDS broke in both the U.S. and Africa—there wasn’t any information,
and Thailand specifically. But it didn’t come as fast as some of us thought
it would. Asia really had become the sex tourist site for many people.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 67 of 96
Sharpless In Bangkok?
Rosenfield Bangkok and outside Bangkok. But when it did hit, Mechai was critical of
the way the Thai government was responding. One, there were people
who were concerned that you shouldn’t even talk about it because of an
impact on tourism. The responsibility was given totally to the ministry of
health. It wasn’t necessarily as strong as some. And he was quite critical of
the programs as it was developing. There was a coup in Thailand in late
’89, late eighties, early nineties, I can’t remember exactly. But it was at a
time when AIDS was really becoming the major issue. And a technocrat
government was set up with a prime minister who was probably the best
prime minister they ever had. I ended up, just by dint of—coming with—
three of my really close friends were ministers in that technocrat
government.
One of them was Mechai. Mechai was a minister in the prime
minister’s office, so the portfolio had been decided by the minister. You
didn’t have a ministry you ran, but it was—[he] had minister in [his] title.
And among other things, he was given responsibility to set up an AIDS
program. The prime minister was concerned. And he took it out of the
authority of the ministry of health, and he put the government’s structure
in the prime minister’s office with him as chair, but with the prime
minister as the chair, but he as sort of the executive director under them,
and developed what I think is a concept that is a model for all countries:
high-level involvement of the prime minister or president; responsibilities
for almost every ministry as to what they should do, whether ministry of
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 68 of 96
defense, ministry of material, ministry of finance—each of them had a
response. And he laid this out in a brilliant way, particularly very heavy on
preventive messages. This is before treatment was available at that time,
but heavy focus on safe sexual practices, and where drugs were used, on
safe drug use—but particularly safe sexual practices.
And Thailand is a country where, while prostitution wasn’t legal, it was
practically accepted, and actually [there] were these women who worked as
sex workers. There were—in those days they called them VD clinics—now
they call them sexually transmitted disease clinics, where women every two
weeks who worked in the brothels [and] the other forms of entertainment
that weren’t called brothels, but where sex took place— were checked
every two or three weeks for gonorrhea, syphilis, and other such diseases.
They put in effect what they were calling 100 percent condom policy,
where people using brothels and having sex with a sex worker were
required to use condoms.
Well, how do you measure that? The initial, short-term way to measure
that was, since the women were being checked every two or three weeks
for sexually transmitted diseases, see what happens. And as this policy
went in and it was being enforced, we saw a dramatic decrease in the
number of cases of syphilis and gonorrhea. And if a woman was positive
for syphilis or gonorrhea, she was fined and so was the brothel. And if
more workers from that brothel continued to turn up positive for sexually
transmitted disease, then the brothel would be fined seriously, and even
closed for six to twelve months. And word got out that if you want to go
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 2 of 3 Page 69 of 96
to a brothel you’re going to have to use a condom, period. And that’s not
as well enforced today as then, but the concept was there.
And I give Mechai credit for developing the construct of what a
national policy should look like, and having the opportunity to enforce it
during his relatively brief, two-year period as a minister running this
program. So, while family planning certainly contributed to Thai’s success
in family planning, in AIDS, he is, in my opinion, the creator of a very
effective program. And the program’s probably quite different today. It’s
now six or seven years since that government ended, and it’s different—
the ministry of health plays a broader role. But the basic framework of
major education on safe sex, condom use being essential, has really
continued. So, he’s a very important figure in my mind in AIDS both in
Thailand and beyond. He’s become a—one of the spokesmen for UN
AIDS, speaks out around the world because he’s a very good public
speaker and a very charismatic figure, and he’s very comfortable in
English. You said you interviewed him?
Sharpless No, Deborah McFarlane, my colleague, did.
Rosenfield Oh, Deborah did, yeah.
Sharpless Okay. Well, let’s stop, but with the view to getting back together again
sometime.
Rosenfield Okay. All right.
Sharpless Thanks.
end Interview 2
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 70 of 96
Interview 3
Sharpless Today is April 27th, 2004. This is the third oral history interview with Dr.
Allan Rosenfield, dean of the Mailman School of Public Health at
Columbia University. My name is Rebecca Sharpless and we are in his
office in New York City.
Rosenfield This is really the third?
Sharpless Yeah, now we did two last October—we did, we did. And so, when we
were together last October—gosh, almost six months ago now—you said
that you wanted to spend some time talking about various people that you
know in the field of reproductive health and public health. So I’m just
going to let you talk and I’ll ask questions occasionally.
Rosenfield Okay. I guess the first person I met in the area of reproductive health was
while I was in Nigeria, where I was teaching obstetrics. And the head of
the department of community medicine at the University of Lagos where I
was, was a public health professor from Johns Hopkins who was there a
couple of years while they were building the department, before a local
Nigerian took over the department. And this is now back in 1966. And he
was already very interested in family planning and its importance, he felt,
to health and development issues in Nigeria.
Sharpless And who was that?
Rosenfield His name was Dr. Robert Wright, W-r-i-g-h-t. He’s deceased. And he was
way ahead of his time, because there weren’t very many people talking,
certainly in Africa, about family planning. And he got me thinking about it
and by the time I left and went to the Pop Council, which we’ve already
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College
Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 71 of 96
been through, Bob is one of the key people as a sort of a senior guru at
that time. I was a relatively young person. It got me interested in thinking
more about it and reading more about it—beginning to understand more.
When I did join the Population Council, it made much more sense because
of what Bob had instilled in me. It is also interesting, by pure coincidence,
one of our social friends in Nigeria was a man named Richard Gamble,
whose father was—I forget what his father’s first name was, but—
Sharpless Clarence.
Rosenfield Clarence Gamble, who was one of the original missionary pioneers in
family planning. Richard, then, was living in Nigeria as a businessman, not
working on family planning activities, although later he became the
president of the Pathfinder Fund, which Clarence had founded. I
remember meeting—I’m not sure when Clarence actually died, but his wife
came through a couple of times—I remember meeting her, talking about
all the work her husband did and some of the original missionary-like
people that worked for Pathfinder.
When I went to Thailand for the Pop Council, there’s several very
important people that I looked up to in those early days. Perhaps the
person that was the greatest model for me was a man named Bernard
Berelson, who was president of the Pop Council. I think all of us who
worked at the council in those days just admired Barney greatly.
Sharpless What was it about him?
Rosenfield Just his integrity, his intellect, his way of thinking. Some of his writings
today would not be seen as sensitive to some of the current issues, but if
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 72 of 96
he’d lived today he would’ve been a leader in reproductive health and all of
that just because of was the type of individual he was. But he was just very
thoughtful and just a very decent good person. I think all of us looked up
to him as a leader that we all admired.
There were other people at the Council in that era that would remain
close friends as long as I knew them. Parker Mauldin, who was a
wonderful applied demographer who became the president of the Council
[for a short period of time], but mainly ran some of the demographic
research work and up into his eighties remained an active figure in the
field. Always looking young and involved and hard working, put out very
important applied publications on various aspects of problems of the use
of family planning and how programs were going and such things.
Also at the council at that time, someone who’s remained a close
personal friend to the present, was Shelly [Sheldon] Segal, who was head of
the biomedical division at the Council then, eventually [went] to be head of
Population Sciences at Rockefeller [Foundation] and [came] back as a
senior scholar at the Pop Council after he finally stepped down at
Rockefeller. Shelly, in those days, was a still a scientist [spending a
percentage of his time] in the laboratory, but [also a] major supporter of a
lot of young people from around the world through the awarding of many
Pop Council biomedical fellowship programs, so a lot of the current
leaders in countries throughout the world originally came through Pop
Council. Shelly still travels the world getting honors and awards from many
of his former fellows, who are now in senior positions in Asia and Latin
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 73 of 96
America, [and to a] lesser extent in Africa.
Sharpless But he took seriously the training of young researchers—
Rosenfield Took it very seriously. Actually, the Council, both in biomedical areas and
demographic areas, was a major [leader in helping develop future] world
leaders in the applied area—now it’s called international health programs,
then the technical assistance division—[but did not have a similar fellows
program]. We didn’t do as good a job—that was the area in which I
worked—in the kind of training programs that both the demography and
biomedical groups did.
Within the Council, the other two people that were important in
running international programs: one was a man named Richmond
Anderson, who was only there a couple of years after I joined. And Cliff
Pease, who I worked with and admired—an old-time, public health,
USAID type who moved to the Pop Council—was there for a number of
years. Very smart, knowledgeable guy.
Sharpless Why do you say he’s an “old-time, public health type”?
Rosenfield He’d been in public health from his early career. Well, before he was
involved with family planning, he worked in a variety of health-related
jobs. And Anderson was, I guess, too, a little different type of person.
Anderson’s career had been mainly in the Rockefeller Foundation, whereas
Cliff was more a USAID—type of things they did. And whatever the
preceding unit [was called]—in the earlier days, I don’t even know what
USAID was called. It was before I was involved. It was USAID by the
time I got involved.
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 74 of 96
Among some of the young people that I met at the Council then, a
couple have died, a couple have continued, have been people I’ve admired
and worked with. John Ross is one, continues to be very productive. He’s
sort of almost an heir to Parker Maudlin in terms of the type of work he
does. John was in Korea for the Council at the same time I was in
Thailand, or part of the time, and then John was back in New York and we
worked together in New York [where he joined me for several years at
Columbia]. And we just remained friends. We lived near each other and we
remained friends over the years.
Another person from those early days who has passed away is Bob
Lapham. He’s another applied demographer, very close to Parker Mauldin,
did a lot of coauthored work with Parker. I was very close to him and his
wife [and he was my deputy in a major Council program called the Taylor-
Berelson Program]. So I was involved and tried to be helpful during his
[illness]—he had a brain tumor, eventually killing him at a relatively young
age, probably in his fifties.
Sharpless How much esprit de corps was there among you young fellows?
Rosenfield Good, it was good. The people from the Council in that era—it was a very
different Pop Council in those days from the Council today. We were all
quite close. Communications were much more difficult. We didn’t have e-
mail, we didn’t have—back when all of us went, in the sixties, we had
almost none of the [modern technologies]—we were still using
mimeograph machines, [carbon paper for letters, no fax machines], and
telephones you didn’t do overseas except in rare occasions, because it was
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 75 of 96
very [difficult]. They had scheduled telephone calls. In Thailand, I had to
go to a central post office to make a call to the United States. And there
was just none of the current conveniences. You met at meetings. You
didn’t communicate—most of us didn’t write a lot of letters, so we didn’t
communicate very much, except when we were together. But those of us
who worked in the Council in that era were quite close and we’d get
together at the meetings [on a regular basis].
And there was a whole slew of people around my age, plus or minus. A
man named Hugo Hoogenboom, who was a lawyer, came to the Council
[initially to backstop staff working in Asia. Previously] he had administered
programs in Asia for USAID and then moved. [Later, under the
presidency of] George Zeidenstein, [he became a] vice president for
[administration]. And then he eventually moved to run AVSC
[International, formerly the Association for Voluntary Surgical
Contraception], which is now called EngenderHealth but at the time it was
AVSC. He ran that for a decade and was quite popular there. He briefly
moved from there to be president of Population Action International,
formerly known as the Population Crisis Committee. It didn’t work well,
so he didn’t stay at that job very long. And he left the [population
reproductive] field, and he’s done some other things in the last year.
(telephone rings)
There were some [other leading] academics. Moye Freymann at UNC
was one of the first people to work overseas as a public health doc in
family planning in India, and then set up the Carolina Population Center
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 76 of 96
[CPC] and was its first director. He was a major figure in the field for many
years. But the last years were not happy: he had some disagreements and
[eventually] left the CPC.
[At the same time, Leslie Cors, a professor at the University of]
Michigan started a population center around the same time. Les was
actually one of the two or three founders of the Population and Family
Planning section of the APHA [American Public Health Association]. I’ve
forgotten where Les worked overseas.
Ron Freedman was another great, great person who was head of the
demographic population center [at Michigan]. One of the nice things about
my time in Thailand is I got to know people that I would not otherwise
have known in the demographic world and in the biomedical world, as well
as in the more applied international health world where I was mainly
involved. So, Ron Freedman and his wife, Deborah, used to come
through, [and my wife and I] got to know them very well and a [large
number of the] leading demographers spent time in Thailand.
Probably the most outstanding was a young man there named John
Knodel, who continues to work in Thailand to this day, primarily at
Chulalongkorn University. When he’s not in Thailand, he’s at Michigan. A
man named Gavin Jones and then Warren Robinson, both economists
who worked at the National Economic and Social Development Board
[NESDB]—great people, particularly Gavin, who [returned to] Australia
but would go back and forth between Australia National University [and
several Asian countries].
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 77 of 96
Sharpless You mentioned working with demographers and other people that you
wouldn’t ordinarily have. How important is interdisciplinarity in public
health?
Rosenfield Oh, I think, if I look at my school of public health today, over 40 percent
of the faculty are social scientists, as compared to, say, medical school
where maybe 1 or 2 percent would be. And you name a discipline and we
have someone from that discipline. So we have lawyers here; we have
people from business backgrounds; we have all the various social sciences,
from anthropologists to sociologists, historians, political scientists,
economists. We have even different parts of the medical and nursing
fields. So public health really brings together a wide array of people.
My first introduction to social science was through Pop Council and
the world of the demographer, particularly the sociology-oriented
demographers, so I got to know a lot of them. And I became what I used
to call a pseudo-demographer by just on-the-job training, by being in
Thailand and dealing with these people. There was another great academic
who was hugely admired by a lot of people named Sidney Goldstein, who
was the chairman of the department of sociology and the population
center at Brown University. [He spent two years in Thailand as an advisor
at Chulalongkorn University when I was at the ministry of public health.]
Sharpless At Brown?
Rosenfield Brown. And he was involved in (unclear). It was endless. It was a great
opportunity to meet all of the people. [An applied demographer, until
recently] running international programs at Pop Council, and before that
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 78 of 96
ran Population Reference Bureau, Peter Donaldson [was a close friend
whom I recruited to the Council]. (pause in recording)
Peter was a University of North Carolina fellow from Thailand and I
sort of recruited him to the Pop Council and then to an evaluation
position at the ministry with me, and then I left and he then stayed on,
worked with other people in Korea. Worked with the Council off and on,
did other things. Now he’s back at the Council for the third time. [Peter
was appointed president of the Population Council in January 2005.]
There were a whole slew of people in USAID, dating back to my early
work with [Reimert] Ravenholt, who I’m sure you’ve interviewed. A very
controversial figure, but a figure that, while sometimes outrageous,
actually, in terms of his baseline concepts of making services available to
people, was correct and played a major role in moving family planning
programs forward [in the early 1970s], even though there were a lot of
[bruised egos along the way]. Dealing with Rei—he wasn’t an easy person.
And within his office, Joe Speidel, who [eventually left to be president of]
Pop Crisis Committee for a while and now Pop Action International and
then, until this past year, he was the population officer at Hewlett. Now
he’s [working at] UCSF [University of California, San Francisco].
Another [major figure], Duff Gillespie, whom I’ve known from the
beginning of his career there—[he spent many years heading USAID’s
Population Office and after leaving USAID he spent a year] as a fellow at
the Packard Foundation. Now he’s at Hopkins in a senior [consultant
position].
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 79 of 96
There were a lot of good people at USAID [in those days]. Liz Maguire
was a wonderful—she was one of our first program officers for what was
called operations research at the time, and she eventually moved on to
become head of the pop office, and now she is happily out of government,
running a pro-choice organization called Ipas. And there were just a whole
series of people at AID that I knew over the years. I almost went to AID.
Sharpless What was it at AID that attracted good folks?
Rosenfield For a long time, that was the largest funder of programs in population—or
in health, for that matter. Steve Sinding [spent many years in leading
positions at USAID], came out of AID, spent time at the World Bank, [ran
a great population program at the Rockefeller Foundation], spent two
years here [at the Mailman School]. Now, of course, he’s running IPPF,
which is a major, important organization in the history of all this. There are
people at the World Bank who played a major role, dating all the way back
to a man named Dr. K. Kanagaratnam, who was the first population
advisor in the Bank.
Sharpless Nobody else has talked to me about the role of the World Bank. Could
you say a little bit about that?
Rosenfield Starting in the early seventies, the World Bank began to get involved—
during the era of McNamara, who was a real hawk on population. And he
attempted to get the organization involved in a major way. The Bank’s
approach in those days, and to a certain extent still, was very cumbersome
and difficult. But they hired a man in the head of health and family
planning in Singapore named Dr. K. Kanagaratnam—his nickname was
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 80 of 96
K.K. And he came to the Bank and tried to run the population
department, but at the time, the Bank was organized differently than now.
At the time the Bank, the population program and the health programs
had their own staff and they actually sent teams into countries and
developed programs. But they were cumbersome and difficult large
programs. I think he did good work when he was in Singapore, [but had a
poor record at the World Bank].
Then he was followed by a [major medical and health academic] named
John Evans, who was committed particularly to international health. John
was a major figure from Canada. His son, Tim Evans, is the person who
[until recently ran the] health sciences program at Rockefeller, now with
WHO [World Health Organization]. Tom Merrick was at the Bank for a
long time. All these people—the Bank position evolved more into a policy
position than a direct program-related position. Steve wrote some very
good papers while he was there on, sort of a focus on where it might go.
And Tom’s been there—he just stepped down and retired this past year, I
think. He must’ve reached the Bank retirement age, which is relatively
young.
And then, there’s a whole bunch of people in various organizations.
Gordon Perkin, who was one of my first contacts when I got to Thailand.
He [worked for] the Ford Foundation, and we became very close friends
there—[a friendship which has continued to the present. After several
more years with Ford in Ghana and then Columbia, he] created an
organization originally called PIACT, Program for the Introduction and
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 81 of 96
Adaptation of Contraceptive Technology, which eventually became
PATH, Program for Appropriate Technology in Health. He did a great job
in developing that program. He also was the key person in the early days at
the Gates Foundation, along with Bill Gates, Sr., Suzanne Cluett, and
eventually Bill Foege as well. And Gordon’s just been around here for a
long, long time, [but now is moving into a senior-consultant–like position
at] Gates. He’s made major contributions over the years in population and
family planning. People who run JSI [John Snow, Inc.], MSH
[Management Sciences for Health], which are with non-profit
organizations, don’t focus solely on population but it’s a major part of
their agendas. Joel Lamstein, who runs JSI, and Ron O’Connor, who runs
MSH, and Dan Pellegrom, who now runs Pathfinder, [are all outstanding
leaders. Dan came to Pathfinder] from the domestic scene where he was
the Planned Parenthood executive director in Baltimore and somewhere
before that.
Sharpless Memphis.
Rosenfield And then he went from there to Pathfinder. He’s been at Pathfinder a long
time. There are several people who moved from the domestic Planned
Parenthood arena to international jobs.
Tony Measham, who spent a long time with the Bank on health, but
did some wonderful work in Latin America with the Ford Foundation. He
worked for a couple of years as deputy director of our Center for
Population and Family Health, then back to Ford in Bangladesh and then
to the World Bank. He was at the Bank for many years and retired
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 82 of 96
recently, but is still very active as a consultant.
There’s a whole group of outstanding women. Sarah Clark, who was at
AID, now running population program at Packard. Sara Seims, who was
also at AID, then MSH, then the Rockefeller Foundation, then Alan
Guttmacher Institute, and now at Hewlett. Jeannie Rosoff, who ran AGI
for a long time. Faye Wattleton, of course, is a superstar, someone I had
the pleasure of working with during—I was on the board of Planned
Parenthood for the entire time she was president, including two or three
years as chairman of the board.
Sharpless Why do you classify her as a superstar?
Rosenfield I think when the history is written on domestic family planning as well as
some international work, Faye will go down in the history of family
planning in this country and reproductive health and rights in the same
league with Margaret Sanger, I predict.
Sharpless Wow.
Rosenfield She’s a very powerful public speaker, very powerful presence.
Controversial, as was Margaret Sanger. Totally devoted to reproductive
rights.
Sharpless Moved Planned Parenthood into providing abortions?
Rosenfield During her tenure, PFA’s commitment that all women should have access
to safe abortion services was greatly strengthened. She was a very strong
spokesman that you can’t separate reproductive rights from contraceptive
rights from women’s rights and that was one continuum. Faye is very
smart. When she has a strong opinion, you know, she doesn’t bend. She
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 83 of 96
will discuss, but it’s hard to get Faye—once Faye becomes convinced of
something, it’s hard to get Faye to moderate those views when she thinks
she is right on a particular issue. So she’s quite strong. Her first successor
would only stay for about two years, Pam Maraldo. And now, with Gloria
Feldt, who is a good friend—Gloria does good work. And there’s Kate
Michelman, who runs NARAL [Pro-Choice America, formerly known as
the National Abortion Rights and Reproductive Action League], is
stepping down. There’s Ellie Smeal, who is president of the Feminist
Majority, on the domestic side of our work.
At the Population Council, John Bongaarts, who is one of the absolute
stars of the demographic field. There’s all the people at UNFPA, from
Nafis Sadik—actually from Rafael Salas to Nafis to Thoraya Obaid. All
interesting and committed. Nafis came from a Pakistani family where
women weren’t supposed to be quite so public, but had a father who
believed in women getting an education and doing things. And then, even
more shocking in a way was Thoraya Obaid, who is a Saudi woman whose
father also believed that a woman should have a right to education and to
do things, and that’s very uncommon for Saudi women from wealthy
families. So those are two rather remarkable women. Nafis was head of
UNFPA for a long time. And even when Rafael Salas was the head, he was
pretty much Mr. Outside raising money and Nafis was running it from
inside. And then when she became the head, she continued, she did both.
She was Ms. Inside and Outside. There was no—she had no Nafis Sadik
working for her. She had some very good people in the next levels down,
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 84 of 96
but there was no one in the kind of role she had taken on with Salas. She
took the work and she was very talented in it.
People at WHO—and there’s the range of people that worked at IPPF,
Julia Henderson, to [Halfdan] Mahler, who was wonderful. Carl Wahren
from Sweden that got into all kinds of battles with some of the people in
the Latin American bureau in some of his attempts to change the
federation. Very interesting man from Malaysia, Bradman Weerakoon, who
preceded Mahler. And the fact that he was going to IPPF was a nice
message to send, that the former head of WHO thought that the field of
population and family planning’s important. And he was quite outspoken
on abortion issues for someone who wasn’t able to be outspoken when he
was at WHO.
Sharpless Interesting.
Rosenfield There’s a lot more names. It’s sort of fun going over them, but why don’t
you ask me questions because I’m just rambling about individuals.
Sharpless No, but it’s interesting. Let me turn the tape right quick.
Tape 1, side 1, ends; side 2 begins.
Sharpless This is not so much about individuals, but say a little bit about what role
the foundations have played in family planning in the last forty or fifty
years.
Rosenfield Well, in the early days, the primary foundations were Ford and Rockefeller.
The Population Council was founded because John D. Rockefeller III
wanted the Rockefeller Foundation to do work in the population field, but
the Foundation board was reluctant. As a result Mr. Rockefeller then
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 85 of 96
decided to establish the Pop Council in the mid 1950s. The Rockefeller
Foundation and later the Ford Foundation contributed the core money to
help them get started and build, and they’ve continued. Although they’ve
both changed their population agenda, in the early days they were very
important.
[Other large foundations that developed agendas in the field of
population, family planning, and reproductive health included the Hewlett,
Mellon, MacArthur and Packard Foundations, although until the 1990s,
Packard focused on the Bay area. The program at Columbia was funded by
all of these foundations at one time or another, with Mellon and Hewlett
providing general purpose use funds since the 1970s. Since the 1990s
Packard and Hewlett have been increasingly important, as both
foundations grew.]
Sharpless Well, one of the things that continues to fascinate—
Rosenfield Buffett Foundation as well.
Sharpless And then Gates.
Rosenfield Gates of course. Gates is the largest foundation [in the world and provides
incredible leadership in the broad area of global health, including
reproductive health].
Sharpless One of the things that continues to fascinate me is the extent—the role of
the foundations in—and the question, do they shape policy, you know, do
they lead or do they follow?
Rosenfield I think both. There are some places where the foundations have taken the
lead and got things going and foundation support. There have been other
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 86 of 96
places where they’ve been willing to support ideas that other people put in.
So I think it is a variable thing.
Sharpless What impact has Gates’ entering the field had?
Rosenfield Well, Gates, when they came on, had a [most important] impact, although
it’s more in global health than [reproductive health] per se. But they’ve
supported a number of [reproductive health] initiatives in the early days,
less so today. They support our maternal mortality initiative. They’re now
more into technology in areas of vaccine development and other
technological innovations, but they still are a strong supporter of
reproductive health issues, globally as well as domestically. Some
domestically. But they [have truly] galvanized the international field.
Sharpless What has been the niche of the UNFPA?
Rosenfield You can say, oh that’s another UN agency so it’s not all that one would
like. But they’ve been a pretty effective organization. They have country
offices and they try to fund and encourage good programs and my guess
is—and I haven’t done an evaluation of the UN in a long time—my guess
is the impact on individual companies and programs would be very
varied—probably, depending on who the staff are and how effective they
are. But I think, overall, the UNFPA [has made very important
contributions] to the field.
Sharpless How important do you think that the population conferences have been—
Bucharest, Mexico City, Cairo?
Rosenfield It seems like the Cairo one changed the paradigm, [which was most
important. And it generated major international attention. But the costs are
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 87 of 96
very high, with] the pre-planning sessions, then the planning sessions, then
the final thing. So people are spending a lot of money. Is that money well
spent? I’m not sure and I think, in fact this year, they’ve decided not to do
another ten-year conference. They’d rather put out some reports. May
make sense in the amount of money that they have to raise from donors
who would do something else if they weren’t doing that. You know, the
whole—I think the foundation world has played a very important role.
Then, obviously, AID and UNFPA and the UN system—it sort of
makes the private role less, because you now have multilateral as well as
bilateral support. The World Bank has been nowhere near as useful as they
should be because they have trouble, in my opinion, dealing with the soft,
social sector programs as compared to the capital programs, building a
dam or a highway or a factory. And they don’t do the others that well. But
their budget support is very large and therefore it’s very important and has
strong influence with the finance ministries.
Sharpless Thinking about the individuals in the field, you know everybody and
everybody knows you. And you’ve mentioned several names, but who
would you say has had the greatest impact on you personally and your
career?
Rosenfield Me personally? Well, a couple of people, I think. [Dr. Martin Cherkasky]
used to be the president of Montefiore Hospital back when I was a
medical student [at Columbia P&S]. The school at that time didn’t care
very much about the community or community activities; rather the people
should be grateful we’re here. [Under Dr. Cherkasky’s leadership,]
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 88 of 96
Montefiore cared about its community and provided [community-oriented]
services. In those days, it was just the beginning of the Einstein Medical
School, so we still rotated up to Montefiore as part of our rotation. He was
a very impressive figure who I think colored my thinking later as I moved
from clinical into public health field.
Bernard Berelson, [president of the Population Council in the late
1960s and early 1970s], also was a major model [and a remarkable leader].
Shelly Segal also was an important influence. The Council people really,
sort of, got me started in this new career that I have. And I left out one of
my—a couple of people I really admire the most: two international people.
Fred Sai is a Ghanaian doctor who was a superstar in the field for many
years. I met him first when he was at IPPF. And probably my closest
friend of that whole group is Mahmoud Fathalla, who is another superb
human being, very quiet and very dedicated. Works in the same kind of
areas I work in.
One of the nice things about this, I haven’t done this—I should
probably do some more thinking, but there’s just so many people whose
paths have crossed mine during this period of time. You know, Thailand
was a great place to be for the six years I was there, because family
planning and population programs were growing. Almost everybody who
traveled to Asia would stop in Thailand, partly because good things were
happening, partly because it was good place to stop en route to wherever
else you were going. So I got to know, in that six years that I was there—
almost everybody who was major in population field came through
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 89 of 96
Bangkok at one time or another. The way things worked, we’d have dinner
together, we had lunch together, we had social time in addition to formal
meetings. It was a great place to meet the major figures of the field and
many of the minor figures.
So the list of names of people with whom I’ve come in contact with in
this field could go on and on. Jim McCarthy who came here, he was
another major person who did a lot of work in adolescent sexuality. He
was someone that, when he graduated with his Ph.D. from Princeton, he
applied for a job here at the same time an African American woman
applied. And for a whole range of reasons, I selected the African American
woman—even though people who knew them both well said in terms of
scholarship and things, Jim will add more to your school. But I didn’t want
to hear that. I wanted to hire a woman who had gotten herself through the
Ph.D. program at Princeton and seemed really smart and I liked her. In the
end, it didn’t work out, though. She only stayed here about three years or
four years. She moved on. She wanted something other than the soft-
money, raise-your-own-money type place, which is not easy for a lot of
people. I think she went on, did fine elsewhere, but Jim went on to
Hopkins at that time, but we ended up recruiting him back to replace me
as the head of the Pop Center and he did a very good job for about twelve
years until he finally left.
Judy Jones, who was the first person I recruited here—Judy came here
with just a bachelor degree. And she had run Preterm in Washington [one
of the first abortion providers in the pre-Roe days]. She’d been a mother
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 90 of 96
first and then she went to—her husband had become a Peace Corps
director in North Africa, and she went there and became a great Peace
Corps person. Came back and helped a man named Harry Levin, who was
a pioneering man, a businessman who worked with the Population Council
on communications and new strategies. He was very much someone who
believed in abortion and abortion rights and abortion services and
eventually left the Council and set up Preterm in Washington. And Judy
[came to work for him and soon became the Preterm director]. Then her
husband took a new job in New York, she came to New York and people
told me, This is a great woman, you ought to meet her. At that time, she
was a young and very smart African American woman. She was the first
person I hired when I moved to Columbia from Pop Council. And she has
stayed [to the present and has been a major force at Columbia].
She helped me basically set up the family planning program that we
run [with a focus on teens. She helped to establish the first evening clinic
at Presbyterian Hospital for teens]—programs, teen activities, the young
men’s clinic. We established the first junior high school, school-based
clinics and then the Ford Foundation and Carnegie Corporation
approached her. They wanted to set up sort of a think tank on children’s
issues. After a lot of debate, she decided to leave her family work and
became the first director of our National Center for Children in Poverty,
also here. Did that for five or six years and then recruited a more
academically oriented person to take it over and she went on to develop
with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation a program [Free to Grow]
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 91 of 96
that works through Head Start to get at parents who have substance abuse
problems. Sort of incubates educational support for the parents of Head
Start children. Very, very creative woman. Raised a huge amount of money
during her time. In every program she was involved in, she raised money
for it. [And she’s a great teacher].
Sharpless Other folks here at Columbia?
Rosenfield Well, Judy’s here. John Ross was here for a number of years. Measham was
here for a while. Jim McCarthy. There’s a [great number of wonderful
people who were there at one time or another at the Center]. There’s a
woman named Susan Philliber, who is a wonderfully talented person. She
left to bring up young children and then founded with her husband her
own consulting firm, Philliber Associates. It’s one of the biggest consulting
firms, not just in family planning and population [issues], but reproductive
health and general health, with offices across the country. [She runs it]
from upstate New York, so she can bring up her kids. Susan Scrimshaw—
who is an anthropologist, dean at the University of Illinois [at Chicago] and
before that she was associate dean at UCLA—left here shortly after I
came, but was someone important for all these years as a leading
anthropologist. A woman named Harriet Presser, who was here when I
came. She went to the University of Maryland. Did wonderful early work
on sterilization. (telephone rings) I mean, it’s endless. I could just keep
going on and on.
[I’ll mention a few more names of people I worked with at the Pop
Center: Martin Gorosh, who was there when I arrived and was very active
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 92 of 96
in our international training efforts; Stephen Isaacs, who developed and
ran our law and policy program; Don Lauro, who was the director of our
large USAID-supported operations research program; Andy Davidson,
who conducted important research efforts; Bill Van Wie, who ran much of
the Center’s teaching program; Ron Waldman, who developed our refugee
health program; Deborah Maine, who ran our AMDD program (I have
mentioned her elsewhere); and Lynn Freedman, who took the law and
policy program and, more recently, the AMDD program.]
Sharon Camp, who now runs AGI, has been just a huge person in the
field from her days of Population Crisis when she was there.
Sharpless How did your paths cross with hers?
Rosenfield Just similar field. In those days, I was very much—we had a lot of funding
from AID, so there was a sort of a group of organizations funded by AID,
plus a couple who weren’t like PCC, Pop Crisis Committee. I was one of
the sort of people who helped lead some of the activities of meeting,
planning and plotting with and against AID on various issues, considering
how to effectively educate and lobby issues. So Sharon and Joe Speidel
were there at the same time. Robin Duke is a close friend, major figure for
many years in the field. I guess if we stayed here for a couple hours, I
could go through another thirty names, but maybe that’s enough. I’m sure
when I think about it, I’m sure I’ll think of all the names I didn’t think of.
Sharpless Certainly you can add those to your transcript if you want to. But just, by
way of summary then, let me—
Rosenfield I think one of the good things—let me say, for summary, from my
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 93 of 96
perspective, having been in the reproductive health field since the late
sixties, it’s been—and even though I’ve gone on doing others things, being
dean, I’ve got a very broad agenda and now I’m much more involved in
AIDS work and maternal mortality work. But sort of my original core was
reproductive health and reproductive rights and I’ve always stuck with it
and I’ve felt fortunate at the numbers of really great people that I’ve come
in contact with and consider friends, even though I don’t see them very
much, except at meetings and such and we always have a good time
reminiscing about the past. We’d have these meetings.
Sharpless Is there anything that these people that you’ve named have in common?
Rosenfield Oh, I think the majority of them have a commitment to women’s health,
women’s rights, the whole pro-choice concept: a woman should have
access to contraception; they should be able to plan their kids when they
want them; if they’re pregnant unnecessarily, that they can, if they so
desire, have the right to terminate the pregnancy. I think there’s a general
commitment to [the empowerment of women and gender equity]. I think
despite the attack of opponents, these are fine, very good people, very
dedicated people. It’s interesting to me when—I think I mentioned my
early ones—when I went from being a medical school–type person to a
person in public health, it’s just a different culture and these type of people
are more—and that isn’t to say in medical school there aren’t great people,
but the whole agenda’s different, somewhat different.
Sharpless Well, I will let you go, but I hope you will take, you know, when we get the
transcript if there are folks that you want put in, by all means—
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Allan Rosenfield, interviewed by Rebecca Sharpless Interview 3 of 3 Page 94 of 96
Rosenfield If you can send it to me as an electronic attachment, it’s a lot easier to edit.
Sharpless Okay. All right. Well, let’s do that.
end Interview 3
© Sophia Smith Collection 2006
Population and Reproductive Health Oral History Project Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College